CPU Comparison

The Intel Core i3-4130T and Intel Xeon X3470 are two processors from different eras, with the data revealing a clear performance hierarchy. Despite the i3-4130T being a newer Haswell part, the Xeon X3470, a Lynnfield-based server chip, consistently outperforms it across every single benchmark recorded. The head-to-head results are remarkably uniform, with the Xeon X3470 winning all five tests by a margin of roughly 14.6% to 14.8%.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking aspect of this comparison is the consistency of the Xeon X3470's victory. In the Cinebench R15 multi-core test, the Xeon scores 287 against the i3-4130T's 245, a lead of 14.6%. This pattern repeats itself almost exactly in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the Xeon's 1199 score dwarfs the i3's 1024, again by 14.6%. The gap persists in the newer Cinebench R23 multi-core test, with the Xeon hitting 2857 and the i3-4130T managing 2440, another 14.6% difference. This isn't a case where one chip wins in older workloads and the other in newer ones; the Xeon's advantage is a constant.

Single-core performance tells a similar story, though the margin is slightly larger in one instance. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the Xeon X3470 scores 169, which is 14.8% higher than the i3-4130T's 144. Cinebench R23 single-core shows a 14.6% lead for the Xeon, with scores of 403 and 344 respectively. While the i3-4130T has a higher average benchmark score of 984 compared to the Xeon's 983, this difference of 0.1% is negligible and falls within the margin of error for these tests. The data is unambiguous: the Xeon X3470 is the faster processor in every measured workload.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i3-4130T has a marginally higher average benchmark score of 984, compared to the Intel Xeon X3470's 983. This 0.1% difference is statistically insignificant and does not reflect the Xeon's consistent wins in individual head-to-head tests.

Q: How large is the performance gap in multi-core workloads?

A: In all three multi-core Cinebench tests (R15, R20, and R23), the Intel Xeon X3470 leads by exactly 14.6%. This consistent margin suggests a fundamental advantage in multi-threaded performance.

Q: Does the Intel Core i3-4130T win any benchmark?

A: No. According to the head-to-head data, the Intel Xeon X3470 wins all five recorded benchmarks. The Intel Core i3-4130T records zero wins (winsA: 0) against the Xeon's five wins (winsB: 5).

Q: Is the single-core performance gap different from the multi-core gap?

A: The gap is nearly identical. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Xeon leads by 14.6%, while in Cinebench R20 single-core, it leads by a slightly larger 14.8%. This shows the Xeon's advantage is not solely dependent on having more cores.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the Intel Xeon X3470?

A: The Intel Xeon X3470 had a launch MSRP of $589.

Q: How do these two processors compare to other CPUs in the database?

A: The Intel Core i3-4130T sits in the 27th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel Xeon X3470 is in the 26th percentile. Both are closely matched with rivals like the Intel Core i7-875K and Intel Xeon W5590, with a 0% to 0.3% delta in average scores.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures that explain their performance characteristics. The Intel Core i3-4130T uses the Haswell architecture on a 22 nm process node, while the Intel Xeon X3470 is based on the older Nehalem architecture on a 45 nm node. This process difference is substantial, with the i3-4130T packing 1,400 million transistors on a 177 mm² die, whereas the Xeon X3470 has only 774 million transistors on a much larger 296 mm² die. The newer, denser process node gives the i3-4130T a theoretical efficiency advantage, but it doesn't translate into higher performance here.

The core configurations are also starkly different. The i3-4130T is a dual-core processor with 4 threads, while the Xeon X3470 is a quad-core processor with 8 threads. This doubling of cores and threads is the primary driver behind the Xeon's multi-core benchmark wins. Cache allocation further differentiates them: the i3-4130T has a 3 MB shared L3 cache, while the Xeon X3470 boasts an 8 MB shared L3 cache. Both have 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 cache per core, but the Xeon's larger L3 cache provides a significant data reservoir for demanding workloads.

Another key architectural difference lies in integrated graphics. The i3-4130T includes Intel HD 4400 graphics, making it a complete package for a basic system. The Xeon X3470, being a server/workstation part, has no integrated graphics (null), requiring a discrete GPU for any display output. The PCIe support also differs, with the i3-4130T offering Gen 3, while the Xeon X3470 is limited to Gen 2 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The Xeon also supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the i3-4130T, which is critical for data integrity in server environments.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets for these two CPUs highlight their divergent target markets. The most obvious difference is core count: the i3-4130T has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the Xeon X3470 has 4 cores and 8 threads. The base clock speeds are nearly identical, with the i3-4130T at 2.90 GHz and the Xeon X3470 at 2.93 GHz. However, the Xeon X3470 features a boost clock of 3.60 GHz, a capability the i3-4130T completely lacks (null).

Power consumption is a major differentiator. The i3-4130T has a TDP of just 35 W, making it highly energy-efficient, while the Xeon X3470 draws 95 W, a figure more than 2.7 times higher. The sockets are incompatible: the i3-4130T uses Intel Socket 1150, while the Xeon X3470 requires Intel Socket 1156. The memory support is also distinct, with the Xeon X3470 offering a rated memory bandwidth of 21.3 GB/s, a figure not specified for the i3-4130T. The Xeon X3470 also supports ECC memory (true), whereas the i3-4130T does not (false).

The production status and release dates reflect their different lifecycles. The i3-4130T was released on 2013-08-31, while the Xeon X3470 is older, released on 2009-09-07, and is marked as "End-of-life" in production status. Their market segments are also distinct: the i3-4130T is a Desktop part, while the Xeon X3470 targets Server/Workstation use. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, and their part numbers are SR1NN for the i3-4130T and SLBJH for the Xeon X3470.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear, if counterintuitive, verdict. Despite being a newer architecture with a smaller process node and significantly lower power consumption, the Intel Core i3-4130T is simply outclassed by the older Intel Xeon X3470 in raw performance. The Xeon's 14.6% to 14.8% lead across all Cinebench tests, both single and multi-core, is decisive. The i3-4130T's only statistical advantage is its average benchmark score of 984 versus the Xeon's 983, a 0.1% difference that doesn't translate into a single win in the head-to-head tests.

From a pure performance standpoint, the Xeon X3470 is the superior processor. Its quad-core, 8-thread configuration with a larger 8 MB L3 cache and boost clock up to 3.60 GHz delivers consistently higher scores. The data suggests that for any workload that can utilize multiple cores, the Xeon X3470 is the clear winner. The i3-4130T's advantages are not in performance but in other areas: its 35 W TDP is dramatically lower than the Xeon's 95 W, and it includes integrated graphics. The Xeon X3470's launch MSRP of $589 also reflects its original high-end server positioning.

For a user prioritizing maximum compute throughput, the Intel Xeon X3470 is the data-driven choice. For a user prioritizing energy efficiency and a simpler, all-in-one platform with integrated graphics, the Intel Core i3-4130T has a clear role. The verdict is not about which is "better" in a vacuum, but which aligns with specific needs, and the data overwhelmingly favors the Xeon for performance.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon X3470 wins in every scenario where processing power is the primary metric. Its victories in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests, with scores of 287, 1199, and 2857 respectively, make it the superior choice for multi-threaded rendering, video encoding, and scientific computing. The Xeon also wins in single-core tests, as shown by its Cinebench R20 score of 169 and R23 score of 403, indicating it is also better for lightly-threaded applications that rely on a single core's performance. The Xeon's support for ECC memory further solidifies its position for server and workstation tasks where data accuracy is paramount. The presence of a boost clock (3.60 GHz) gives it additional headroom under variable loads.

The Intel Core i3-4130T does not win any benchmark tests, but it wins in other categories. Its 35 W TDP makes it a superior choice for low-power, compact, or passively cooled systems where heat and energy consumption are critical constraints. The inclusion of Intel HD 4400 integrated graphics means it can power a display without a separate graphics card, making it ideal for basic office work, media playback, or a home theater PC. Its newer 22 nm process node and Socket 1150 compatibility suggest a more modern platform. The i3-4130T's 27th percentile ranking is also marginally higher than the Xeon's 26th, though this is a negligible difference. The data shows the Xeon X3470 is the performance winner, while the i3-4130T is the efficiency and platform integration winner.