Intel Core i3-13100T vs Intel Xeon E-2374G Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a remarkably consistent pattern across all six Cinebench comparisons: the Intel Xeon E-2374G wins every single head-to-head test, though by a narrow margin. The largest advantage appears in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the Xeon scores 672 against the Core i3-13100T's 642, a delta of 4.7%. This is the biggest percentage gap in the entire comparison, indicating that the Xeon's single-thread performance edge is slightly more pronounced in that particular workload.

The multi-core tests tell a similar story. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon E-2374G records 1142 points versus 1092 for the Core i3-13100T, a 4.6% advantage. The same 4.6% delta appears in Cinebench R20 multi-core (4760 vs 4552) and Cinebench R23 multi-core (11335 vs 10840). This uniformity across three generations of the Cinebench suite suggests that the performance relationship between these two processors is consistent regardless of the specific rendering workload intensity.

Single-core performance follows the same pattern. Cinebench R15 single-core shows the Xeon at 161 versus 154 for the i3, a 4.5% lead. Cinebench R23 single-core records 1600 for the Xeon against 1530 for the i3, again a 4.6% gap. The data shows no test where the Core i3-13100T manages to close the gap below 4.5%, and no test where it pulls ahead. The Xeon's advantage is uniform, narrow, and persistent across all six recorded benchmarks.

Looking at the average benchmark scores, the Xeon E-2374G sits at 3278 overall, while the Core i3-13100T averages 3198. That is a 2.5% difference in the aggregate figure, which aligns with the per-test deltas. Both processors occupy the 53rd percentile among all CPUs in the database, meaning they are statistically indistinguishable in terms of overall positioning relative to the broader CPU landscape. The nearest rivals for the Xeon include the Intel Core i3-12100T and AMD Ryzen Embedded V2516, both with an average score of 3277 and a delta of 0%, confirming that the Xeon is tightly clustered with those parts. The Core i3-13100T's nearest rival is the Intel Core i7-9700E at 3197 with a 0% delta, again showing a dense competitive field.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most head-to-head benchmark comparisons?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2374G wins all six recorded comparisons, with deltas ranging from 4.5% to 4.7% across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core tests.

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

A: The largest gap is 4.7%, recorded in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the Xeon E-2374G scores 672 versus 642 for the Core i3-13100T.

Q: How do these two CPUs compare in overall average benchmark score?

A: The Xeon E-2374G has an average benchmark score of 3278, while the Core i3-13100T averages 3198. Both sit at the 53rd percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Q: Are there any benchmarks where the Core i3-13100T comes out ahead?

A: No. The recorded data shows zero wins for the Core i3-13100T across the six head-to-head Cinebench comparisons.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Xeon E-2374G supports ECC memory, while the Core i3-13100T does not.

Q: What is the difference in TDP between the two?

A: The Xeon E-2374G has a TDP of 80, while the Core i3-13100T has a TDP of 35.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon E-2374G wins every benchmark in the comparison, so its use case is straightforward: any workload that relies on Cinebench-style rendering performance benefits from the Xeon's consistent 4.5% to 4.7% edge. This includes both single-threaded tasks, where the Xeon's 5.00 GHz boost clock likely contributes to its advantage, and multi-threaded workloads, where the eight threads across four cores deliver higher aggregate throughput. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, which makes it suitable for server or workstation environments where data integrity is a priority. Its market segment is explicitly listed as Server/Workstation, reinforcing this positioning.

The Core i3-13100T, despite losing all six benchmarks, has its own strengths that are not captured in the Cinebench results. It carries a 35 TDP versus the Xeon's 80, which indicates significantly lower power consumption and heat output. For systems where thermal headroom or power efficiency is the primary constraint, the i3-13100T is the more conservative choice. It also supports DDR5 memory in addition to DDR4, whereas the Xeon is limited to DDR4. The i3's integrated graphics, UHD Graphics 730, may be adequate for basic display output, though the Xeon's UHD Graphics P750 is also present. The i3-13100T is classified as a Desktop part, suggesting it is aimed at mainstream consumer systems rather than dedicated compute nodes.

For workloads outside of Cinebench, the i3-13100T's Geekbench scores (4993 multi-core, 1780 single-core) are not directly comparable to the Xeon, which lacks Geekbench entries in the database. The i3's advantage in memory flexibility and power efficiency may make it the better fit for compact or fanless builds, while the Xeon's ECC support and higher boost clock favor reliability-focused or single-thread-sensitive applications.

Specification Differences

The most obvious difference is the socket: the Xeon E-2374G uses Intel Socket 1200, while the Core i3-13100T uses Intel Socket 1700. This means they are not interchangeable in any motherboard. The Xeon comes from the Xeon E-2300 series, while the i3 belongs to the Core 13th Gen family. The Xeon's base clock is 3.70 GHz with a boost of 5.00 GHz; the i3's base is 2.50 GHz with a boost of 4.20 GHz. The Xeon has a TDP of 80, the i3 has a TDP of 35. Memory support differs: the Xeon supports only DDR4, while the i3 supports both DDR4 and DDR5. The Xeon's memory bandwidth is listed at 51.2 GB/s, while the i3 has no recorded bandwidth figure. The Xeon supports ECC memory; the i3 does not. PCIe connectivity also differs: the Xeon provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the i3 provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics are different as well: UHD Graphics P750 on the Xeon versus UHD Graphics 730 on the i3. The Xeon has a die size of 276 mm², while the i3 is 163 mm². The Xeon's launch MSRP is $334, and the i3's launch MSRP is $134. Both are locked multipliers, both are currently active in production, and both have 4 cores and 8 threads.

Architecture Differences

The Xeon E-2374G is built on Rocket Lake, specifically the Rocket Lake-E variant, using a 14 nm process node from Intel. Its cache layout includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. The Core i3-13100T is based on Raptor Lake, specifically Raptor Lake-S, using a 10 nm process node. Its L1 cache is identical at 80 KB per core, but the L2 cache is larger at 1.25 MB per core, and the L3 cache is 12 MB shared. The Xeon's release date is September 7, 2021, while the i3's release date is January 3, 2023. The Xeon's part number is SRKN3, and the i3's is SRMBT. The Xeon's codename is Rocket Lake-E, and the i3 is Raptor Lake-S. Both CPUs are manufactured by Intel, and neither has a transistor count listed in the database. The Xeon's foundry is Intel, as is the i3's. The Xeon's memory bus is dual-channel, and the i3's is also dual-channel. The Xeon's market segment is Server/Workstation, while the i3 is Desktop. The Xeon's generation is listed as Xeon E (Rocket Lake-E), and the i3's generation is Core i3 (Raptor Lake).

The architectural differences explain the benchmark results. The Xeon's higher boost clock (5.00 vs 4.20 GHz) likely drives its single-core wins, while the i3's larger L2 and L3 caches do not compensate in the Cinebench tests. The i3's 10 nm process node gives it a die size advantage (163 mm² vs 276 mm²), which contributes to its lower TDP. The Xeon's 14 nm node is larger and consumes more power, but it delivers slightly better performance in every recorded test. The i3's support for DDR5 memory is a generational upgrade, but the Xeon's ECC support and higher memory bandwidth are workstation-oriented features that the i3 lacks entirely.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear, if modest, winner: the Intel Xeon E-2374G outperforms the Intel Core i3-13100T in every Cinebench benchmark recorded, with deltas between 4.5% and 4.7%. For anyone whose workload is dominated by rendering or multi-threaded compute tasks, the Xeon is the stronger choice based on these measurements. Its ECC memory support and server/workstation classification further align it with reliability-focused deployments where data corruption is unacceptable. The Xeon's higher TDP and larger die size are trade-offs, but they come with a consistent performance advantage.

The Core i3-13100T is the better option for scenarios where power efficiency is paramount. Its 35 TDP is less than half the Xeon's 80, making it suitable for thermally constrained systems. It also offers DDR5 support and a smaller die, which may appeal to builders looking for a modern, low-power desktop part. The i3's average benchmark score of 3198 is only 2.5% behind the Xeon's 3278, and both occupy the same 53rd percentile, so users who prioritize power savings will not sacrifice much in raw Cinebench performance. The i3 also has the advantage of a lower launch MSRP, though this analysis does not weigh cost considerations.

In practical terms, the choice comes down to the platform: Socket 1200 for the Xeon versus Socket 1700 for the i3. The Xeon is aimed at servers and workstations, where ECC memory and sustained multi-threaded performance matter. The i3 is a desktop part that excels in efficiency and memory flexibility. If the motherboard and memory type are already decided, that will dictate the processor. If starting fresh, the Xeon offers a small but consistent performance edge, while the i3 offers a significant power savings and newer memory support. Neither processor is a clear winner in the broader CPU landscape, as both sit at the 53rd percentile, but within this head-to-head, the Xeon is the faster part in every measured test.