CPU Comparison

Intel Core i3-4130 vs Intel Xeon X5570 is a matchup between two very different Intel designs that end up delivering nearly identical application performance. The data shows a clean sweep for the Core i3-4130 across all five Cinebench tests, but the margins are razor-thin, with every victory coming by less than 1.2%. The Xeon X5570 counters with an 8 MB shared L3 cache, triple-channel memory, and ECC support, while the Core i3-4130 relies on a newer 22 nm process and a higher base clock to edge out a win in every benchmark. This is a generational clash where architectural age is offset by core count, and the benchmark results indicate that the newer dual-core part just barely outpaces the older quad-core server chip.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Core i3-4130 wins all five head-to-head Cinebench tests, but the margins are uniformly small. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i3-4130 scores 285 against the Xeon X5570's 283, a 0.7% lead. The R20 multi-core test shows a similar pattern: 1189 for the i3-4130 versus 1180 for the Xeon, a 0.8% advantage. The R23 multi-core result continues the trend, with the i3-4130 posting 2833 and the Xeon X5570 at 2810, again a 0.8% gap.

Single-core results tell the same story with slightly larger margins. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i3-4130 scores 168 against the Xeon's 166, a 1.2% lead, the largest delta in any test. The R23 single-core test shows 400 for the i3-4130 versus 396 for the Xeon, a 1% advantage. Across all five tests, the i3-4130's biggest win is that 1.2% single-core margin, while its smallest is the 0.7% R15 multi-core result.

The consistency of these results is notable. The Xeon X5570 has double the cores and threads (4 cores/8 threads versus 2 cores/4 threads), yet it cannot overcome the i3-4130's higher base clock of 3.40 GHz versus 2.93 GHz. The Xeon's boost clock of 3.33 GHz still falls short of the i3-4130's base clock, which helps explain why the newer part wins even in multi-threaded workloads. The overall average benchmark score reflects this narrow gap: the i3-4130 sits at 975, while the Xeon X5570 is at 967, a 0.8% difference that mirrors the head-to-head deltas.

Both processors sit at the 26th percentile among all CPUs, meaning they are statistically equivalent in the broader performance distribution. The i3-4130's nearest rivals include the AMD Athlon X4 840, Intel Core i3-4150T, and AMD A10-7870K, all with an average score of 975 and a 0% delta. The Xeon X5570's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 3700U and Intel Core i5-2400S, both at 968 with a -0.1% delta. This placement confirms that despite the architectural gap, these two processors occupy the same performance tier.

Architecture Differences

The Core i3-4130 is built on Intel's Haswell architecture using a 22 nm process node, packing 1,400 million transistors on a 177 mm² die. The Xeon X5570 uses the older Nehalem architecture (codename Gainestown) on a 45 nm process, with 731 million transistors on a larger 263 mm² die. This process advantage gives the i3-4130 a significantly lower TDP of 54 watts versus the Xeon's 95 watts, despite the Xeon having double the cores.

Cache configurations differ substantially. Both processors have 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core, but the shared L3 cache favors the Xeon: 8 MB shared versus just 3 MB shared on the i3-4130. This 5 MB difference in L3 capacity is the Xeon's most significant architectural advantage, potentially helping in workloads that benefit from larger working sets.

Memory support shows another key divergence. The Xeon X5570 features triple-channel DDR3 memory with a rated bandwidth of 32.0 GB/s, while the i3-4130 uses dual-channel DDR3 with no listed bandwidth figure. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, a feature absent from the i3-4130. The i3-4130 counters with PCIe Gen 3 support, while the Xeon is limited to PCIe Gen 2. The i3-4130 includes integrated Intel HD 4400 graphics, whereas the Xeon has no integrated graphics at all.

Platform compatibility differs completely. The i3-4130 uses Intel Socket 1150 and targets the desktop market, while the Xeon X5570 uses Intel Socket 1366 and targets server/workstation systems. The Xeon is end-of-life in production status, while the i3-4130 remains active. Release dates are separated by roughly four and a half years: the Xeon launched in March 2009, the i3-4130 in August 2013.

Where Each One Wins

The Core i3-4130 wins every benchmark in this comparison, so the use-case split is primarily about features rather than raw performance. The i3-4130 is the clear choice for desktop systems where integrated graphics are needed, as it provides Intel HD 4400 while the Xeon offers none. Its lower 54 W TDP makes it suitable for compact or power-conscious builds, and its 22 nm process gives it a modern efficiency profile.

The Xeon X5570 wins on memory bandwidth and capacity. Its triple-channel memory configuration with 32.0 GB/s rated bandwidth doubles the memory channels of the i3-4130's dual-channel setup. The 8 MB shared L3 cache is more than double the i3-4130's 3 MB, which could matter for server workloads with larger data sets. ECC memory support is a definitive advantage for the Xeon, making it the only option for systems requiring error-correcting memory.

The Xeon also wins on core count, offering 4 cores and 8 threads versus the i3-4130's 2 cores and 4 threads. In multi-threaded scenarios where the Cinebench results show near-parity, this core advantage is what keeps the Xeon competitive despite its older architecture and lower clocks. The Xeon's boost clock of 3.33 GHz provides some flexibility, though it still trails the i3-4130's fixed 3.40 GHz base clock.

For gaming or general desktop use, the i3-4130's integrated graphics, PCIe Gen 3 support, and higher base clock make it the more practical choice. For server deployments requiring ECC memory, higher memory bandwidth, or more physical cores, the Xeon X5570 is the only option that fits. The i3-4130's active production status and newer architecture suggest better long-term availability for replacement parts.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core Cinebench tests?

A: The Core i3-4130 wins all three multi-core tests: Cinebench R15 (285 vs 283), R20 (1189 vs 1180), and R23 (2833 vs 2810), with margins between 0.7% and 0.8%.

Q: Does the Xeon X5570 have any performance advantage over the Core i3-4130?

A: No, the Xeon X5570 loses all five head-to-head benchmarks. Its largest deficit is 1.2% in Cinebench R20 single-core, and its smallest is 0.7% in Cinebench R15 multi-core.

Q: What is the difference in memory channel support?

A: The Xeon X5570 supports triple-channel DDR3 memory with 32.0 GB/s rated bandwidth, while the Core i3-4130 uses dual-channel DDR3 with no bandwidth figure listed.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: Only the Xeon X5570 supports ECC memory. The Core i3-4130 does not list ECC support.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Core i3-4130 has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the Xeon X5570 has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Core i3-4130 includes Intel HD 4400 integrated graphics. The Xeon X5570 has no integrated graphics.

The Verdict

The data points to the Core i3-4130 as the better-performing processor for nearly every benchmark scenario. It wins all five head-to-head tests, posts a higher average benchmark score (975 vs 967), and does so with significantly lower power consumption (54 W TDP vs 95 W). The i3-4130's 3.40 GHz base clock outpaces the Xeon's 2.93 GHz base and 3.33 GHz boost, and the newer 22 nm Haswell architecture delivers better per-clock performance than the 45 nm Nehalem design.

However, the Xeon X5570 is not without purpose. Its 8 MB shared L3 cache and triple-channel memory with 32.0 GB/s bandwidth make it the superior choice for memory-intensive server workloads. ECC memory support is a mandatory feature for many server environments, and the Xeon is the only one of the two that offers it. The Xeon's 4 cores and 8 threads provide more parallel processing headroom, even if the benchmark results show it cannot translate that into a Cinebench win.

The core decision comes down to platform and feature requirements. For a desktop user needing integrated graphics, PCIe Gen 3, and lower power draw, the Core i3-4130 is the clear winner based on both benchmark performance and platform suitability. For a server or workstation requiring ECC memory, triple-channel bandwidth, and more physical cores, the Xeon X5570 is the only viable option despite losing every performance test. The Xeon's launch MSRP was $1386, reflecting its enterprise positioning, while the i3-4130 targets the mainstream desktop segment.

Both processors sit at the 26th percentile among all CPUs, which means neither is a performance outlier. The i3-4130's nearest rival is the AMD Athlon X4 840 with a 0% delta, while the Xeon X5570's closest competitor is the Intel Celeron N5100 with a 0.1% delta. This parity underscores how close these two processors are in real-world performance, making the decision purely about platform features rather than speed.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i3-4130 | Intel Xeon X5570 |

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

| Cores | 2 | 4 |

| Threads | 4 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 3.40 GHz | 2.93 GHz |

| Boost Clock | None | 3.33 GHz |

| TDP | 54 W | 95 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1150 | Intel Socket 1366 |

| Architecture | Haswell | Nehalem |

| Process Node | 22 nm | 45 nm |

| Transistors | 1,400 million | 731 million |

| Die Size | 177 mm² | 263 mm² |

| L3 Cache | 3 MB (shared) | 8 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Triple-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not listed | 32.0 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 3 | Gen 2 |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 4400 | None |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

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

| Release Date | 2013-08-31 | 2009-03-29 |

| Part Number | SR1NP | SLBF3 |