Intel Core i3-1125G4 vs Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clean sweep for the Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3 across all six shared Cinebench tests, with the narrowest margin coming in at 10.2% and the widest at 10.8%. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Xeon scores 873 against the Core i3-1125G4's 792, a 10.2% advantage. The single-core R15 result follows the same pattern: 123 versus 111, which translates to a 10.8% lead for the Xeon, its largest win in any head-to-head comparison.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the Xeon posts 3640 in multicore while the i3 manages 3301, a 10.3% margin. The single-core R20 test shows 513 against 465, again a 10.3% difference. Cinebench R23 multicore continues the trend: 8668 for the Xeon versus 7860 for the i3, with the same 10.3% delta. The single-core R23 result is 1223 against 1109, also a 10.3% gap.

What stands out is the consistency of the margins. The Xeon does not merely edge ahead in one workload; it maintains a nearly uniform 10% advantage across every generation of Cinebench, from R15 through R23, and in both single-threaded and multi-threaded runs. This uniformity suggests the performance gap is structural rather than workload-specific. The i3 does have additional Geekbench scores in the database (4509 multicore, 1461 singlecore), but no head-to-head Geekbench comparison exists between these two parts, so those figures cannot be used for direct comparison.

The average benchmark scores reflect the same hierarchy. The Xeon holds an average score of 2507, placing it in the 49th percentile of all CPUs. The i3 averages 2451, sitting at the 48th percentile. The delta between their averages is modest, but the head-to-head Cinebench data tells a clearer story: the Xeon wins every recorded encounter, and it does so by a double-digit percentage each time.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from opposite ends of Intel's design philosophy. The Xeon E5-2630 v3 is a Haswell-EP server part built on a 22 nm process, while the Core i3-1125G4 is a Tiger Lake-U mobile chip manufactured on Intel's 10 nm node. The Xeon's die spans 356 mm² and contains 2,600 million transistors. The i3's die is 144 mm², with no transistor count recorded in the database.

Core counts diverge sharply. The Xeon offers 8 cores and 16 threads, double the i3's 4 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks tell a curious story: the Xeon runs at 2.40 GHz, while the i3's base is listed as 2000.00 MHz (which is 2.00 GHz). However, the boost clocks reverse the order. The Xeon boosts to 3.20 GHz, while the i3 reaches 3.70 GHz, a higher ceiling despite its lower base.

Cache layouts reflect their different roles. The Xeon uses 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, with a large 20 MB shared L3 cache. The i3 packs more L1 per core at 80 KB, and significantly more L2 at 1.25 MB per core, but its shared L3 is just 8 MB. The larger L3 on the Xeon suits its server workload, while the i3's generous per-core L2 helps a mobile chip with fewer cores.

Memory architecture separates them further. The Xeon supports DDR4 over a quad-channel bus, yielding 59.7 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The i3 also supports DDR4, plus LPDDR4X, but only over a dual-channel bus, and its bandwidth figure is not recorded. ECC memory is supported on the Xeon but absent on the i3. PCIe lanes differ as well: the Xeon provides 40 lanes of Gen 3, while the i3 provides 16 lanes of Gen 4. The i3 includes integrated Iris Xe-LP Graphics G4, whereas the Xeon has no integrated graphics at all.

Socket and market positioning reinforce the divide. The Xeon uses Intel Socket 2011-3 and targets the server/workstation segment. The i3 uses Intel BGA 1449 and targets mobile devices. The Xeon launched in 2014 with a launch MSRP of $667. The i3 launched in 2021 with a launch MSRP of $281. Both parts are marked end-of-life in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon E5-2630 v3 wins every benchmark where both processors are measured. That includes all six Cinebench tests, both single-core and multi-core variants. Its advantages range from 10.2% to 10.8%, which is a meaningful margin in rendering workloads. The Xeon's 8-core, 16-thread configuration naturally favors multi-threaded tasks, and the data confirms this: it leads by 10.3% in R23 multicore, a test that scales well with core count.

What is less obvious is that the Xeon also wins single-core tests. Despite the i3's higher boost clock of 3.70 GHz versus 3.20 GHz, the Xeon still manages a 10.3% lead in R23 single-core and a 10.8% lead in R15 single-core. This suggests the older Haswell architecture, with its larger L3 cache and higher base clock, delivers better per-thread performance in these specific workloads than the newer Willow Cove design at a lower base frequency.

The i3-1125G4's strengths are not visible in the head-to-head data, but its profile points to different priorities. Its 15 W TDP versus the Xeon's 85 W TDP makes it suitable for power-constrained environments. Its integrated graphics and support for LPDDR4X memory indicate a design aimed at thin-and-light laptops, where the Xeon's server platform would be impractical. The i3's Gen 4 PCIe lanes, despite fewer of them, offer newer connectivity standards.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core i3-1125G4 has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two in any benchmark?

A: The largest gap is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the Xeon scores 123 against the i3's 111, a 10.8% advantage.

Q: Does the Core i3-1125G4 win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. The database records 6 wins for the Xeon and 0 wins for the i3 across all shared Cinebench tests.

Q: What memory features does each processor support?

A: The Xeon supports DDR4 with a quad-channel bus and ECC memory, offering 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The i3 supports DDR4 and LPDDR4X with a dual-channel bus, but does not support ECC.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: Only the Core i3-1125G4 has integrated graphics, specifically Iris Xe-LP Graphics G4. The Xeon has no integrated graphics.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Xeon averages 2507, placing in the 49th percentile of all CPUs. The i3 averages 2451, placing in the 48th percentile.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3 | Intel Core i3-1125G4 |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 8 | 4 |

| Threads | 16 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 2.40 GHz | 2000.00 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.20 GHz | 3.70 GHz |

| TDP | 85 W | 15 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 | Intel BGA 1449 |

| Architecture | Haswell | Tiger Lake |

| Codename | Haswell-EP | Tiger Lake-U |

| Process Node | 22 nm | 10 nm |

| Die Size | 356 mm² | 144 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 256 KB (per core) | 1.25 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 20 MB (shared) | 8 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR4, LPDDR4X |

| Memory Bus | Quad-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 59.7 GB/s | Not recorded |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 40 Lanes | Gen 4, 16 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | None | Iris Xe-LP Graphics G4 |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2014-09-07 | 2021-03-30 |

| Launch MSRP | $667 | $281 |

| Part Number | SR206 | SRK8S |

The Verdict

The data directs a clear choice for raw compute performance: the Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3 outperforms the Core i3-1125G4 in every measured benchmark, with a consistent 10% lead across all Cinebench versions. Its 8-core, 16-thread design, combined with a 20 MB L3 cache and quad-channel memory, makes it the superior option for rendering, multi-threaded processing, and memory-intensive server workloads. The Xeon's 49th percentile average score versus the i3's 48th percentile reinforces this, though the gap in averages is smaller than the head-to-head margins.

The Core i3-1125G4 is not without its own rationale. Its 15 W TDP, integrated Iris Xe graphics, and mobile socket make it the only viable choice for laptop or power-sensitive builds. The i3's higher boost clock of 3.70 GHz and newer 10 nm process do not translate into benchmark wins in this dataset, but its support for LPDDR4X and Gen 4 PCIe lanes point toward a more modern feature set.

For a stationary workstation or server environment where performance is the priority, the Xeon E5-2630 v3 is the clear winner from the recorded data. For a mobile platform where power consumption and integrated graphics matter more than raw Cinebench scores, the i3-1125G4 holds the advantage by design. The benchmark results settle the question of speed; the specification sheet settles the question of suitability.