Intel Core i3-4150T vs Intel Xeon W5590 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents an unusually consistent picture. Across every recorded Cinebench test, the Intel Xeon W5590 posts a victory over the Intel Core i3-4150T, with the margin hovering in a tight band between 18.0% and 18.3%. This is not a case where architectural strengths shift the outcome depending on workload; the Xeon simply leads everywhere.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Xeon W5590 scores 288 against 244 for the Core i3-4150T, a delta of 18%. The R20 multicore run shows 1204 versus 1018, which translates to an 18.3% advantage. The single-core tests tell the same story. R20 single-core has the Xeon at 169 and the i3 at 143, an 18.2% gap, while R23 single-core records 404 versus 342, an 18.1% difference. The R23 multicore result, 2867 for the Xeon and 2425 for the i3, is also 18.2% in favor of the older part.

What stands out is the uniformity of the margin. Whether the workload scales across all threads or runs on a single core, the Xeon W5590 maintains roughly the same lead. This suggests the performance difference is not tied to parallel efficiency or core count scaling, but rather to a fundamental per-thread capability gap that carries over to multithreaded results. The i3-4150T has fewer cores and threads, yet the percentage gap does not widen in multicore tests, which implies the Xeon's advantage is not primarily about having twice the thread count, but about each thread being faster to begin with.

The average benchmark score in the database reinforces the head-to-head outcome. The Xeon W5590 sits at an average of 986, while the Core i3-4150T records 975. That is a slim aggregate difference, but the dedicated head-to-head Cinebench runs show a clear and repeated pattern. The Xeon also holds a slightly higher percentile ranking versus all CPUs in the database, at 27 compared to 26 for the i3. Neither processor is near the top of the overall standings, but the Xeon edges ahead in both raw scores and relative placement.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different eras and different design philosophies. The Intel Xeon W5590 is built on the Nehalem architecture, specifically the Gainestown codename, and uses a 45 nm process node. It packs 731 million transistors into a 263 mm² die. The Core i3-4150T, by contrast, is a Haswell part, also from Intel, fabricated on a 22 nm node with 1,400 million transistors in a 177 mm² die. The transistor count is nearly double, and the die is substantially smaller, which reflects the density improvement of the newer process.

Core configuration differs significantly. The Xeon W5590 offers 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Core i3-4150T offers only 2 cores and 4 threads. Both support simultaneous multithreading, but the Xeon has twice the physical core count. Cache hierarchies also diverge. The Xeon has 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, identical per-core figures to the i3, but its shared L3 cache is 8 MB. The i3 has a much smaller 3 MB shared L3. That 5 MB difference in last-level cache could matter in workloads with larger working sets.

Clock speeds tell a nuanced story. The Xeon W5590 has a base clock of 3.33 GHz and a boost clock of 3.60 GHz. The Core i3-4150T has a base clock of 2.90 GHz and no boost clock at all. The i3 is a locked, low-power part, and it does not dynamically raise its frequency. The Xeon's higher clocks, combined with its additional cores, explain the consistent benchmark lead.

Memory support also separates the two. Both use DDR3, but the Xeon W5590 runs a triple-channel memory bus with a recorded bandwidth of 32.0 GB/s. The Core i3-4150T runs a dual-channel bus, and the database lists no memory bandwidth figure for it. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, while the i3 does not. PCIe generations differ as well: the Xeon is Gen 2, the i3 is Gen 3. The i3 includes integrated graphics, the Intel HD 4400, while the Xeon has no integrated graphics at all. The Xeon targets the server and workstation segment, whereas the i3 is a desktop part. The Xeon is end-of-life, released in August 2009 with a launch MSRP of $1600, while the i3 was released in April 2014.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data does not show any benchmark category where the Core i3-4150T beats the Xeon W5590. Every head-to-head test in the database is won by the Xeon. That said, the nature of the wins matters for real-world interpretation.

The Xeon W5590 wins in all multicore tests by roughly 18%, which aligns with its extra cores and threads. It also wins every single-core test by the same margin. This is the more surprising result. The i3-4150T is a much newer design with a denser process, but its lower base clock of 2.90 GHz and lack of boost capability leave it behind even when only one core is active. The Xeon's 3.60 GHz boost clock gives it a frequency advantage that the i3 cannot counter.

For workloads that rely heavily on memory bandwidth, the Xeon has a clear theoretical edge with its triple-channel configuration and 32.0 GB/s recorded bandwidth. The i3's dual-channel setup has no recorded bandwidth figure in the database, but the architectural difference points in the Xeon's favor. For workloads that need ECC memory, the Xeon is the only option of the two, as the i3 does not support ECC.

The i3-4150T does have advantages outside raw compute benchmarks. It integrates Intel HD 4400 graphics, so a system built around it does not require a discrete GPU for basic display output. It uses a much lower 35 W TDP compared to the Xeon's 130 W, which makes it far easier to cool and suitable for compact or low-power builds. It also uses the Intel Socket 1150 platform rather than the older Socket 1366, and its PCIe Gen 3 support is a generation ahead. However, none of these advantages show up in the Cinebench scores recorded in the database.

The Verdict

The data is straightforward. The Intel Xeon W5590 outperforms the Intel Core i3-4150T in every benchmark test where both were measured. The margins are consistent, between 18.0% and 18.3%, across both single-core and multicore workloads. The Xeon's higher clock speeds, larger L3 cache, additional cores, and triple-channel memory support all contribute to this result.

The Core i3-4150T is not without merit, but its merits are not visible in compute benchmarks. It has a dramatically lower TDP of 35 W versus 130 W, integrated graphics, a newer PCIe generation, and a much later release date. For a user prioritizing power efficiency, a modern platform, or integrated display output, the i3 has clear appeal. But for pure processing throughput, the Xeon W5590 is the stronger part by a meaningful and consistent margin.

The average benchmark scores in the database are close, 986 for the Xeon and 975 for the i3, which might suggest near parity. The dedicated head-to-head runs tell a different story. The Xeon leads by 18% in every Cinebench test, and that is the more reliable indicator of performance in threaded and single-threaded compute tasks alike.

The Xeon also ranks at the 27th percentile versus all CPUs in the database, slightly above the i3's 26th percentile. Neither chip is a performance leader by modern standards, but within this pairing, the Xeon is clearly the faster processor. The i3's strongest argument is efficiency and platform modernity, not speed.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in single-core workloads?

A: The Intel Xeon W5590 wins every single-core benchmark in the database. In Cinebench R20 single-core, it scores 169 versus 143 for the Core i3-4150T, an 18.2% advantage. In R23 single-core, it scores 404 versus 342, an 18.1% lead.

Q: How much does the Core i3-4150T trail in multicore performance?

A: The Core i3-4150T trails by roughly 18% in all recorded multicore tests. Cinebench R15 multicore shows 288 for the Xeon and 244 for the i3, an 18% gap, while R20 multicore shows 1204 versus 1018, an 18.3% gap.

Q: Do the two processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes for the Xeon W5590, no for the Core i3-4150T. The Xeon supports ECC memory, which makes it suitable for server or workstation use where data integrity is critical. The i3 does not support ECC.

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

A: The Intel Xeon W5590 has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Intel Core i3-4150T has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: Only the Intel Core i3-4150T has integrated graphics, specifically Intel HD 4400. The Intel Xeon W5590 has no integrated graphics and requires a discrete GPU for display output.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel Xeon W5590 has an average benchmark score of 986, while the Intel Core i3-4150T has an average of 975. The Xeon also holds a 27th percentile ranking versus all CPUs, slightly ahead of the i3's 26th percentile.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon W5590 | Intel Core i3-4150T |

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

| Cores | 4 | 2 |

| Threads | 8 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 3.33 GHz | 2.90 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.60 GHz | None |

| TDP | 130 W | 35 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1366 | Intel Socket 1150 |

| Architecture | Nehalem | Haswell |

| Codename | Gainestown | Haswell |

| Process Node | 45 nm | 22 nm |

| Transistors | 731 million | 1,400 million |

| Die Size | 263 mm² | 177 mm² |

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

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

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

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe Generation | Gen 2 | Gen 3 |

| Integrated Graphics | None | Intel HD 4400 |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2009-08-08 | 2014-04-30 |

| Launch MSRP | $1600 | Not recorded |

| Part Number | SLBGE | Not recorded |