Intel Core i3-1315UE vs Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clean sweep for the Intel Core i3-1315UE across every Cinebench workload, though the margins are consistently narrow. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i3-1315UE scores 606 against the Xeon E3-1265L v4's 595, a 1.8% advantage. The single-core result in the same test is closer still: 85 versus 84, a 1.2% lead. These are not transformative differences; they indicate that the two processors occupy a similar performance tier, with the newer mobile part edging ahead in every scenario.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the pattern repeats. The i3-1315UE delivers 2525 in multi-core, while the Xeon E3-1265L v4 manages 2482, a 1.7% gap. Single-core in R20 shows 356 against 350, again a 1.7% difference. The largest absolute separation appears in Cinebench R23, where the i3-1315UE posts 6013 multi-core and 849 single-core, versus 5910 and 834 for the Xeon. The multi-core delta is 1.7%, and the single-core delta is 1.8%. Across six benchmarks, the i3-1315UE wins all six, with the Xeon E3-1265L v4 taking none.

What do these numbers mean in context? The average benchmark score for the i3-1315UE is 1739, placing it at the 41st percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Xeon E3-1265L v4 sits at 1709 average, the 40th percentile. The nearest rivals to the i3-1315UE include the Intel Core i3-10100 at 1742 (0.1% higher), the AMD Ryzen 3 4300U at 1742 (0.2% higher), and the Intel Core i5-6600 at 1744 (0.3% higher). For the Xeon, the closest competitor is the Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 at 1709 (0% delta), followed by the Intel Core i7-990X at 1713 (0.2% lower). These comparisons show that both CPUs are surrounded by older or lower-tier parts, and the performance difference between the two is roughly the same magnitude as the variance among their nearest rivals.

The head-to-head deltas, all between 1.2% and 1.8%, are consistent. There is no workload where the Xeon E3-1265L v4 reverses the trend. The i3-1315UE's advantage is real but modest, and it does not suggest a dramatic generational leap in raw compute. Instead, the data points to a nuanced picture: the Raptor Lake part wins on every metric, but a user migrating from the Broadwell Xeon would not experience a night-and-day shift in Cinebench scores.

Architecture Differences

The two CPUs come from different architectural eras and target different market segments. The Intel Core i3-1315UE is built on Raptor Lake, specifically the Raptor Lake-U codename, using a 10 nm process node. It is a mobile part, released on 2023-01-03, and remains in active production. The Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4 uses the Broadwell architecture, codename Broadwell-DT, on a 14 nm process node. It is a server or workstation chip, released on 2015-06-01, and is now end-of-life. The process node difference, 10 nm versus 14 nm, contributes to the i3-1315UE's efficiency and higher clock potential, though the benchmark results show only a small performance gap.

Core counts differ. The i3-1315UE has 6 cores and 8 threads, while the Xeon E3-1265L v4 has 4 cores and 8 threads. Both support simultaneous multithreading, but the i3-1315UE brings two additional physical cores. Despite this, the multi-core benchmark scores are nearly identical, with the i3-1315UE leading by only 1.7% to 1.8%. This suggests that the Xeon's older Broadwell cores are more efficient per-core in multi-threaded workloads, or that the i3-1315UE's lower base clock (1200 MHz versus 2300 MHz) limits its sustained multi-core output. The boost clocks tell a different story: the i3-1315UE boosts to 4500 MHz, well above the Xeon's 3300 MHz, which explains the single-core advantage.

Cache hierarchies are distinct. The i3-1315UE has 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 10 MB shared L3. The Xeon E3-1265L v4 has 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 6 MB shared L3. The i3-1315UE's larger L2 and L3 caches are typical for a newer architecture and likely aid in single-threaded responsiveness. The Xeon compensates with a larger die size of 182 mm², whereas the i3-1315UE's die size is not recorded in the database.

Memory support diverges sharply. The i3-1315UE supports DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration, with no ECC capability. The Xeon E3-1265L v4 supports only DDR3, also dual-channel, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s and full ECC support. The Xeon's ECC memory is a notable feature for server or workstation reliability, while the i3-1315UE's modern DDR5 support offers higher potential bandwidth, though the database records no bandwidth figure for it.

PCIe capabilities differ by generation and lane count. The i3-1315UE provides PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only), while the Xeon E3-1265L v4 provides PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The i3-1315UE's newer Gen 4 standard offers more bandwidth per lane, but the Xeon has double the lane count. Integrated graphics also differ: the i3-1315UE uses UHD Graphics 64EU, while the Xeon uses Intel Iris Pro P6300. Neither is a high-end GPU, but the database records their presence without performance metrics.

The i3-1315UE has a TDP of 15 watts, a mobile-class power envelope. The Xeon E3-1265L v4 has a TDP of 35 watts, more than double, reflecting its server-oriented design and older process. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The Xeon has a part number (SR2B3) and a launch MSRP of $417, while the i3-1315UE has no recorded MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has a higher single-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core i3-1315UE scores 849, while the Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4 scores 834, a 1.8% difference in favor of the i3-1315UE.

Q: Does the Xeon E3-1265L v4 support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Xeon E3-1265L v4 supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core i3-1315UE does not. The Xeon also uses DDR3 memory, whereas the i3-1315UE supports DDR4 and DDR5.

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The Intel Core i3-1315UE has 6 cores and 8 threads. The Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4 has 4 cores and 8 threads. Both use simultaneous multithreading to reach 8 threads.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two?

A: The i3-1315UE has an average benchmark score of 1739, and the Xeon E3-1265L v4 has an average of 1709. The i3-1315UE is 30 points higher, approximately 1.8% above the Xeon.

Q: Which CPU has a higher TDP?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4 has a TDP of 35 watts, while the Intel Core i3-1315UE has a TDP of 15 watts. The Xeon consumes more than double the power budget.

Q: Are both processors still in production?

A: No. The Intel Core i3-1315UE is listed as active, while the Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4 is end-of-life. The Xeon was released in June 2015, and the i3-1315UE in January 2023.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Core i3-1315UE | Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4 |

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

| Cores | 6 | 4 |

| Threads | 8 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 1200 MHz | 2300 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 4500 MHz | 3300 MHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 35 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1744 | Intel Socket 1150 |

| Architecture | Raptor Lake | Broadwell |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-U | Broadwell-DT |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 14 nm |

| Die Size | Not recorded | 182 mm² |

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

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

| L3 Cache | 10 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not recorded | 29.9 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | False | True |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 8 Lanes | Gen 3, 16 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 64EU | Intel Iris Pro P6300 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Server/Workstation |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2023-01-03 | 2015-06-01 |

| Launch MSRP | None recorded | $417 |

| Unlocked Multiplier | False | False |

| Part Number | None recorded | SR2B3 |

| Percentile vs All CPUs | 41 | 40 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 1739 | 1709 |

The Verdict

The benchmark data shows that the Intel Core i3-1315UE is the faster processor in every recorded Cinebench test, but the margins are narrow. Across R15, R20, and R23, the i3-1315UE leads by 1.2% to 1.8% in both single-core and multi-core workloads. Its 6 cores and 8 threads, combined with a 4500 MHz boost clock and 10 MB L3 cache, provide a slight edge over the Xeon E3-1265L v4's 4 cores, 3300 MHz boost, and 6 MB L3. The i3-1315UE also offers modern memory support (DDR4 and DDR5), PCIe Gen 4, and a much lower TDP of 15 watts versus 35 watts.

The Xeon E3-1265L v4 is not without merit. It supports ECC memory, which the i3-1315UE lacks, and it provides 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, double the i3-1315UE's 8 Gen 4 lanes. Its DDR3 memory support is older, but the recorded bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s is specified, and its server or workstation segment suggests a focus on stability over raw speed. The Xeon also has a recorded launch MSRP of $417, though pricing considerations are not part of this analysis.

For a mobile or low-power deployment, the i3-1315UE is the clear choice. Its 15-watt TDP, active production status, and higher benchmark scores align with modern laptop designs. For a legacy server or workstation requiring ECC memory and a larger PCIe lane count, the Xeon E3-1265L v4 remains a functional option, but it is end-of-life and slower in all measured workloads. The data supports selecting the i3-1315UE for performance and efficiency, while reserving the Xeon for specific reliability-oriented use cases where ECC is mandatory. The performance gap is small enough that either CPU can handle similar workloads, but the i3-1315UE's wins across all six benchmarks give it the overall edge.