Intel Core i3-13100E vs Intel Xeon Silver 4116 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a consistent sweep for the Intel Xeon Silver 4116 across every Cinebench iteration in the comparison set. The Xeon wins all six head-to-head tests, with the Core i3-13100E recording zero wins. The margins are remarkably uniform, with the Xeon holding a 10.2% advantage in five of the six tests and a 10.3% edge in the remaining one.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Xeon Silver 4116 scores 1301 against 1180 for the Core i3-13100E, a 10.3% lead. The single-core test in R15 shows the Xeon at 183 versus 166, a 10.2% difference. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multicore result is 5421 for the Xeon and 4918 for the Core i3, again a 10.2% gap. The R20 single-core score sits at 765 for the Xeon and 694 for the Core i3, maintaining the same 10.2% delta.

Cinebench R23, the most demanding workload in the set, shows the Xeon Silver 4116 at 12908 multicore and 1822 single-core. The Core i3-13100E trails with 11710 multicore and 1653 single-core, with both deltas at 10.2%. This uniformity across all tests suggests the performance gap is consistent regardless of whether the workload is single-threaded or multi-threaded, and it scales across different Cinebench versions.

The average benchmark scores place the Xeon Silver 4116 at 3733, while the Core i3-13100E sits at 3668, a 65-point difference. Both processors share the same 56th percentile against all CPUs in the database, meaning they occupy the same overall rank tier despite the Xeon's consistent head-to-head wins. The Xeon's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE with an average score of 3732 and a delta of 0%, plus the Intel Core i5-11600T at 3742 with a -0.2% delta. The Core i3-13100E's nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 7251 at 3671 with a -0.1% delta and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700X at 3673 with the same -0.1% delta.

The data indicates that while the Xeon Silver 4116 wins every direct comparison, the Core i3-13100E is not far behind in absolute terms. A 10.2% margin is meaningful but not overwhelming, and the Core i3's higher boost clock and newer architecture likely narrow what would otherwise be a larger gap given the difference in core counts.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from entirely different design lineages. The Intel Xeon Silver 4116 is built on the Skylake-SP architecture using a 14 nm process node, while the Intel Core i3-13100E uses Raptor Lake-S architecture on a 10 nm node. This generational difference is substantial, with the Core i3 being roughly five years newer in release timing, as the Xeon launched in July 2017 and the Core i3 in January 2023.

Core and thread counts diverge sharply. The Xeon Silver 4116 packs 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Core i3-13100E has 4 cores and 8 threads. Despite having three times the core count, the Xeon only manages a 10.2% lead in multicore benchmarks, which speaks to the Core i3's much higher per-core efficiency and clock speeds. The Xeon's base clock is 2.10 GHz with a boost of 3.00 GHz, while the Core i3 runs at 3.30 GHz base and 4.40 GHz boost, giving it a 43% higher boost frequency.

Cache hierarchies differ in both size and organization. The Xeon Silver 4116 has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16.5 MB of shared L3. The Core i3-13100E has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The Xeon has more total L3, but the Core i3 has larger per-core L1 and L2 allocations, which helps explain its strong single-threaded showing despite lower overall core count.

Memory support also sets them apart. The Xeon Silver 4116 supports DDR4 only, while the Core i3-13100E supports both DDR4 and DDR5. The Core i3 also has a dual-channel memory bus, while the Xeon's memory bus specification is not recorded. Both support ECC memory, which is notable for the Core i3 given its desktop market segment. The Xeon targets the Server/Workstation segment, while the Core i3 is a Desktop part, and the Core i3 includes integrated UHD Graphics 730, whereas the Xeon has no integrated graphics listed.

The Core i3-13100E features PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Xeon's PCIe configuration is not recorded. The Xeon has 8,000 million transistors on its 14 nm die, while the Core i3's transistor count is not listed, though its die size is 163 mm², compared to an unrecorded die size for the Xeon. The Core i3's production status is Active, while the Xeon's production status is not specified.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The Intel Xeon Silver 4116 wins all 6 recorded head-to-head tests against the Intel Core i3-13100E, which records 0 wins. The deltas range from 10.2% to 10.3% in favor of the Xeon.

Q: What is the single largest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest delta is 10.3% in Cinebench R15 multicore, where the Xeon Silver 4116 scores 1301 against the Core i3-13100E's 1180. All other tests show a 10.2% gap.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Xeon Silver 4116 has an average benchmark score of 3733, while the Core i3-13100E averages 3668. This places both at the 56th percentile against all CPUs in the database.

Q: Does the Core i3-13100E offer any advantages in memory support?

A: Yes, the Core i3-13100E supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Xeon Silver 4116 supports DDR4 only. The Core i3 also has a dual-channel memory bus, and both processors support ECC memory.

Q: Are these processors in the same performance tier despite the head-to-head results?

A: Both occupy the same 56th percentile against all CPUs, but their nearest rivals differ. The Xeon's closest rival is the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE with a 0% delta, while the Core i3's closest rival is the AMD EPYC 7251 with a -0.1% delta.

Q: What is the production status of each processor?

A: The Core i3-13100E is marked as Active, while the Xeon Silver 4116 has no production status recorded in the database.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification category. The Xeon Silver 4116 has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Core i3-13100E has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Xeon's base clock is 2.10 GHz versus 3.30 GHz for the Core i3, and the boost clock is 3.00 GHz versus 4.40 GHz. Thermal design power favors the Core i3 at 60 watts, while the Xeon is rated at 85 watts.

Socket compatibility is entirely different: the Xeon uses Intel Socket 3647, while the Core i3 uses Intel Socket 1700. The architecture and codename differ as well, with Skylake and Skylake-SP for the Xeon versus Raptor Lake and Raptor Lake-S for the Core i3. The process node is 14 nm for the Xeon and 10 nm for the Core i3. The Xeon has 8,000 million transistors, while the Core i3's count is unrecorded, but the Core i3 has a die size of 163 mm² versus no recorded die size for the Xeon.

Cache configurations differ in all three levels. The Xeon has 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 16.5 MB shared L3. The Core i3 has 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 12 MB shared L3. Memory support shows the Xeon limited to DDR4, while the Core i3 supports DDR4 and DDR5. The Core i3 has a dual-channel memory bus, while the Xeon's bus is unrecorded. Both support ECC memory.

The Core i3-13100E includes PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Xeon's PCIe support is not recorded. Integrated graphics are present only on the Core i3 with UHD Graphics 730; the Xeon has none listed. Market segments differ, with the Xeon aimed at Server/Workstation and the Core i3 at Desktop. The Core i3 has a launch MSRP of $480, while the Xeon has no recorded launch MSRP. Release dates are July 2017 for the Xeon and January 2023 for the Core i3. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear, though narrow, overall winner in the Intel Xeon Silver 4116. It wins every head-to-head benchmark, holds a higher average benchmark score at 3733 versus 3668, and offers three times the core count and three times the thread count. The 10.2% to 10.3% margins are consistent across single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads, indicating that the Xeon's advantage is not workload-dependent but rather a general performance edge.

However, the Core i3-13100E is not a distant second. Its 10 nm node, higher boost clock of 4.40 GHz, and support for DDR5 memory make it a more modern design. The fact that it stays within 10.2% of a 12-core Xeon while using only 4 cores confirms its architectural efficiency. For workloads that depend heavily on single-thread performance, the Core i3's higher clocks and larger per-core caches partially offset the Xeon's core advantage, though the recorded single-core scores still favor the Xeon by the same 10.2% margin.

The Xeon Silver 4116 is the pick for server or workstation deployments where the 12-core, 24-thread configuration and 16.5 MB of shared L3 cache provide headroom for parallel throughput. The Core i3-13100E suits desktop builds where the integrated UHD Graphics 730 eliminates the need for a discrete GPU, and where the 60-watt TDP and DDR5 support offer efficiency and modern memory compatibility. ECC support on both makes either viable for reliability-sensitive tasks.

The percentile ranking of 56 for both processors against all CPUs tells a more nuanced story: despite the Xeon's head-to-head sweep, neither chip is dramatically above the other in the broader competitive landscape. The Xeon's nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE, matches its average score exactly at 3732 with a 0% delta, while the Core i3's nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 7251, comes within 0.1% at 3671. The Core i3-13100E edges out the Intel Core i9-10885H by 0.5%, showing it holds its own against higher-tier parts.

Ultimately, the Xeon Silver 4116 wins on raw benchmark results, but the Core i3-13100E wins on modernity, efficiency, and platform features. The choice depends on whether the priority is maximum multicore throughput in a server context or a current-generation desktop platform with integrated graphics and DDR5 support. The recorded data does not show the Core i3 catching the Xeon in any test, but it also does not show a blowout. A 10.2% gap with a 60-watt TDP against an 85-watt TDP is a respectable showing for the smaller chip.