CPU Comparison

# FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i3-13100E has an average benchmark score of 3668, while the Intel Xeon E5-2658A v3 scores 3658. The difference is 0.3% in favor of the Core i3, placing both at the 56th percentile among all CPUs.

Q: Does the Xeon E5-2658A v3 win any benchmark comparisons?

A: Yes. Across all six head-to-head Cinebench tests (R15, R20, and R23, both single-core and multi-core), the Xeon wins every round, with deltas ranging from -7.3% to -7.4% relative to the Core i3. That means the Xeon finishes roughly 7.4% ahead in each test.

Q: How do the core counts and threads compare?

A: The Core i3-13100E has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Xeon E5-2658A v3 has 12 cores and 24 threads. Despite having three times the core count, the Xeon only leads by about 7.4% in multi-threaded Cinebench workloads.

Q: Which CPU supports more memory channels?

A: The Xeon E5-2658A v3 supports quad-channel DDR4 memory with a listed bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s, whereas the Core i3-13100E supports dual-channel DDR4 or DDR5 with no bandwidth figure provided.

Q: Does the Core i3 have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the Core i3-13100E includes UHD Graphics 730. The Xeon E5-2658A v3 has no integrated graphics, so a discrete GPU is mandatory for any display output.

Q: What are the production statuses?

A: The Core i3-13100E is listed as Active, while the Xeon E5-2658A v3 is End-of-life. The Xeon has no listed release date; the Core i3 was released on 2023-01-03.

# The Verdict

The data presents a clear but surprising outcome: the older, server-oriented Xeon E5-2658A v3 outperforms the newer desktop Core i3-13100E in every single Cinebench benchmark recorded. The Xeon leads by a consistent 7.3% to 7.4% margin across both single-core and multi-core tests. That consistency is remarkable given the architectural gap, the Xeon is a 22 nm Haswell-EP part, while the Core i3 is a 10 nm Raptor Lake design.

However, the average benchmark scores tell a different story. The Core i3 edges ahead with 3668 versus 3658, a 0.3% difference. This suggests that outside of Cinebench, the Core i3 recovers ground, likely due to its much higher clock speeds and newer architecture. The Core i3 boosts to 4.40 GHz, compared to the Xeon's 2.90 GHz, and its single-core performance is far stronger in absolute terms, even if Cinebench scores show the Xeon ahead.

For builders choosing between these two, the decision hinges on workload and platform. The Xeon E5-2658A v3 offers 12 cores, 24 threads, quad-channel memory, and 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, features that suit multi-threaded server or workstation tasks. The Core i3-13100E counters with DDR5 support, PCIe Gen 5, integrated graphics, and a much lower 60 W TDP versus the Xeon's 105 W.

Pick the Xeon if you need raw multi-threading on a server platform with high memory bandwidth and don't mind an end-of-life part. Pick the Core i3 if you want a modern desktop socket, lower power draw, integrated graphics, and the flexibility of DDR5. The benchmark data shows the Xeon wins every Cinebench test, but the Core i3's overall average score is slightly higher, so neither is a universal winner.

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are one-sided. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 1274 against the Core i3's 1180, a -7.4% delta. Single-core R15 follows the same pattern: 179 for the Xeon versus 166, a -7.3% delta. The pattern repeats in R20: multi-core 5311 versus 4918 (-7.4%), single-core 749 versus 694 (-7.3%). R23 shows 12647 versus 11710 (-7.4%) for multi-core and 1785 versus 1653 (-7.4%) for single-core.

The Xeon's advantage is remarkably uniform, every test lands within a narrow band of -7.3% to -7.4%. This suggests a systematic performance edge rather than a workload-specific quirk. The Xeon's 12 cores and 24 threads clearly help in multi-threaded tests, but its single-core wins are more surprising given the Core i3's 4.40 GHz boost clock versus the Xeon's 2.90 GHz.

The Core i3's best showing comes in the overall average benchmark score, where it leads 3668 to 3658. That 0.3% margin is small but meaningful, indicating that the Core i3 performs better in non-Cinebench workloads that are part of the average score calculation. The nearest rivals list confirms this: the Core i3 sits 0.3% ahead of the Xeon in average score, while the Xeon sits 0.3% behind the Core i3.

# Specification Differences

The two CPUs differ across nearly every specification category. The Core i3-13100E has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Xeon E5-2658A v3 has 12 cores and 24 threads. Base clocks are 3.30 GHz versus 2.20 GHz, and boost clocks are 4.40 GHz versus 2.90 GHz, respectively. TDP is 60 W for the Core i3 and 105 W for the Xeon.

Sockets are incompatible: the Core i3 uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Xeon uses Intel Socket 2011-3. Memory support differs, the Core i3 supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Xeon only supports DDR4. The Core i3 has dual-channel memory, the Xeon has quad-channel. The Xeon has a listed memory bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s; the Core i3 has no listed bandwidth figure.

PCIe capabilities differ: the Core i3 offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Xeon offers Gen 3 with 40 lanes (CPU only). The Core i3 includes UHD Graphics 730; the Xeon has no integrated graphics. The Core i3's process node is 10 nm, the Xeon's is 22 nm. Die size is 163 mm² versus 356 mm². The Xeon lists 2,600 million transistors; the Core i3 does not list a transistor count.

Market segments differ: the Core i3 is Desktop, the Xeon is Server/Workstation. Production status: Active versus End-of-life. The Core i3 was released on 2023-01-03; the Xeon has no release date. Launch MSRP is $480 for the Core i3 and $1832 for the Xeon. Part numbers are SRMFR and SR27T, respectively. Neither CPU has an unlocked multiplier.

# Architecture Differences

The Core i3-13100E is built on Raptor Lake-S architecture, a 10 nm process from Intel. The Xeon E5-2658A v3 uses Haswell-EP, a 22 nm process. The Core i3's die size is 163 mm², while the Xeon's is 356 mm², more than double the area. The Xeon's transistor count is 2,600 million; the Core i3 does not report a figure.

Cache layouts differ significantly. The Core i3 has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The Xeon has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3. Despite having fewer cores, the Core i3's L3 cache is 12 MB shared, while the Xeon's 30 MB shared L3 is more than double. The Core i3's L2 cache per core is larger, but the Xeon's total L2 across 12 cores likely exceeds the Core i3's across 4.

Memory architecture differs: the Core i3 supports dual-channel DDR4 and DDR5, while the Xeon supports quad-channel DDR4 only. The Xeon's memory bandwidth is listed at 68.3 GB/s. The Core i3's memory bandwidth is not listed. Both support ECC memory.

The Core i3 has integrated UHD Graphics 730; the Xeon has none. The Core i3's PCIe is Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while the Xeon's is Gen 3 with 40 lanes. This means the Xeon offers more expansion lanes, but at an older standard. The Core i3's Raptor Lake architecture is newer by several generations, which explains its higher clocks and lower TDP despite fewer cores.

# Where Each One Wins

The Xeon E5-2658A v3 wins in every Cinebench benchmark category. It leads by 7.4% in multi-core tests across R15, R20, and R23, and by 7.3% in single-core tests. This makes it the clear choice for Cinebench-style rendering workloads, where the extra cores and threads (12 versus 4) provide a measurable advantage. The Xeon also wins on memory bandwidth with its quad-channel configuration and 68.3 GB/s listed throughput, which benefits memory-intensive server tasks.

The Core i3-13100E wins on overall average benchmark score, albeit narrowly at 3668 versus 3658. This suggests it performs better in workloads outside Cinebench, likely benefiting from its higher boost clock (4.40 GHz versus 2.90 GHz) and newer Raptor Lake architecture. The Core i3 also wins on power efficiency, with a 60 W TDP versus the Xeon's 105 W, making it a better fit for compact or energy-conscious builds.

For platform flexibility, the Core i3 wins with DDR5 support, PCIe Gen 5, and integrated graphics, all absent from the Xeon. The Xeon's 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes and quad-channel memory are advantages for server or workstation expansion, but the Core i3's modern features are more relevant for a desktop build.

Use-case split: choose the Xeon for multi-threaded rendering, server workloads, or any task that leverages its 12 cores and 24 threads. Choose the Core i3 for single-threaded responsiveness, lower power draw, modern platform features, or when integrated graphics are required. The data shows the Xeon wins every Cinebench test, but the Core i3's slightly higher average score indicates it is the more balanced overall performer.