Intel Core i3-4170 vs Intel Xeon D-1520 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon D-1520 wins every recorded head-to-head comparison. The most striking pattern is the consistency of the margin. Across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, the multi-core advantage stays remarkably stable at 37.6%. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Xeon scores 421 against the Core i3-4170's 306. That same 37.6% gap repeats in Cinebench R20 multicore (1755 vs 1275) and Cinebench R23 multicore (4179 vs 3038).

Single-core results tell a similar story, though with slightly different margins. The Xeon leads by 37.2% in Cinebench R20 single-core (247 vs 180) and by 37.5% in Cinebench R23 single-core (590 vs 429). Interestingly, the single-core deltas are almost identical to the multi-core ones, which suggests the advantage comes from architectural efficiency rather than just extra cores.

The Core i3-4170 does not win a single head-to-head benchmark in the database. That is a clean sweep: 5 wins for the Xeon, 0 for the i3. The data shows no test where the higher base clock of the i3 translates into a victory. Even in single-threaded workloads, where the i3's 3.70 GHz base clock should theoretically help, the Xeon's 2.20 GHz base with boost to 2.60 GHz still manages to pull ahead by roughly 37%.

Looking at the broader picture, both processors sit near the same percentile range. The Xeon D-1520 lands at the 34th percentile among all CPUs, while the Core i3-4170 sits at the 33rd percentile. Their average benchmark scores are close too: 1209 for the Xeon versus 1193 for the i3. But those averages include different test sets. The head-to-head tests, which use identical workloads, show a far larger separation than the overall averages would suggest.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon D-1520 wins everywhere the database measures. For multi-threaded workloads, the advantage is decisive and consistent. Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multicore all show the same 37.6% lead. This makes sense given the core and thread counts: the Xeon has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the i3 has 2 cores and 4 threads. The Xeon's extra threads provide a clear scaling benefit in rendering and heavily parallel tasks.

Single-threaded performance is where the i3 might have hoped to compete, given its much higher base clock. But the data shows the Xeon leads by 37.2% in R20 single-core and 37.5% in R23 single-core. This is counterintuitive at first glance. A 3.70 GHz dual-core should usually beat a 2.20 GHz quad-core in single-thread work. The recorded results indicate the Xeon's Broadwell architecture extracts more instructions per clock, enough to overcome the clock deficit.

For use-case planning, the Xeon is the pick for server or workstation workloads where threaded rendering, virtualization, or database tasks dominate. The i3, despite losing every benchmark, remains a functional desktop part with integrated graphics (Intel HD 4400) and a familiar LGA 1150 socket. If a system needs basic display output without a discrete GPU, the i3 has that capability; the Xeon has no integrated graphics at all.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Xeon D-1520. It leads by 37.6% in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multicore tests. The scores are 421 vs 306 (R15), 1755 vs 1275 (R20), and 4179 vs 3038 (R23).

Q: Does the Core i3-4170 win in single-core tests due to its higher clock speed?

A: No. Despite the i3's 3.70 GHz base clock versus the Xeon's 2.20 GHz base, the Xeon wins single-core tests by 37.2% in Cinebench R20 and 37.5% in Cinebench R23. The Xeon scores 247 vs 180 in R20 single-core, and 590 vs 429 in R23 single-core.

Q: How do these CPUs compare in the overall database standings?

A: The Xeon D-1520 sits at the 34th percentile among all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 1209. The Core i3-4170 sits at the 33rd percentile with an average score of 1193. They are close in overall ranking, but the head-to-head tests show a much larger performance gap.

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Xeon D-1520 supports ECC memory. The Core i3-4170 does not support ECC. This is a key differentiator for server or workstation builds where data integrity matters.

Q: What are the memory support differences?

A: The Xeon D-1520 supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory. The Core i3-4170 supports only DDR3. Both use a dual-channel memory bus, but the i3 lists a memory bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s; the Xeon does not list a bandwidth figure in the database.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: Only the Core i3-4170 has integrated graphics, specifically Intel HD 4400. The Xeon D-1520 has no integrated graphics, so it requires a discrete GPU for display output.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification. The Xeon D-1520 has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Core i3-4170 has 2 cores and 4 threads. Base clocks are significantly different: the Xeon runs at 2.20 GHz with a boost clock of 2.60 GHz, while the i3 runs at 3.70 GHz with no boost clock listed. Thermal design power favors the Xeon at 45 watts versus 54 watts for the i3.

Sockets are incompatible. The Xeon uses Intel BGA 1667, a soldered embedded form factor. The i3 uses Intel Socket 1150, a standard desktop LGA socket. The Xeon supports DDR3 and DDR4 memory; the i3 supports only DDR3. The Xeon has ECC memory support; the i3 does not. The Xeon provides 24 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, while the i3 provides 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes.

Integrated graphics are present only on the i3 (Intel HD 4400). The Xeon has none. Market segments differ: the Xeon is aimed at Server/Workstation, the i3 at Desktop. Production status also differs: the Xeon is still Active, while the i3 is End-of-life. Release dates are close but not identical: the Xeon launched in March 2015, the i3 in April 2014. The launch MSRP was $199 for the Xeon and $117 for the i3.

Architecture Differences

The Xeon D-1520 uses the Broadwell architecture on a 14 nm process node. The Core i3-4170 uses the Haswell architecture on a 22 nm process node. Both are manufactured by Intel, but the process shrink gives the Xeon a transistor density advantage. The Xeon packs 3,200 million transistors on a 246 mm² die. The i3 has 1,400 million transistors on a 177 mm² die.

Cache layouts differ substantially. The Xeon has 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, same as the i3. But the L3 cache is organized differently: the Xeon has 1.5 MB per core, while the i3 has 3 MB shared. For a quad-core Xeon, that means up to 6 MB of total L3, versus 3 MB for the dual-core i3. The per-core L3 allocation is identical (1.5 MB per core), but the shared design on the i3 means both cores contend for the same pool.

The Xeon's generation is listed as "Xeon D (Broadwell-DE)", indicating a server-oriented derivative. The i3's generation is "Core i3 (Haswell)", a mainstream desktop part. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not an option for either. The Xeon's part number is SR29B, the i3's is SR1PL.

The Verdict

The data directs a clear choice for most workloads. The Intel Xeon D-1520 outperforms the Core i3-4170 in every recorded benchmark. If the task involves Cinebench-style rendering, multi-threaded compilation, or any parallel workload, the Xeon delivers a 37.6% advantage across the board. The Xeon also offers ECC memory support, dual memory types (DDR3 and DDR4), and 24 PCIe lanes, making it the more capable platform for server and workstation builds.

The Core i3-4170 is not without a role, however. It has integrated graphics, which the Xeon lacks entirely. For a basic desktop system without a discrete GPU, the i3 can drive a display out of the box. Its 1150 socket is a standard desktop interface, which means it fits into conventional motherboards rather than the Xeon's BGA 1667 soldered design. The i3 also has a much higher base clock at 3.70 GHz, which might help in legacy software that is poorly threaded and sensitive to clock speed, though the benchmark data does not show this translating into any actual wins.

The average benchmark scores are nearly identical: 1209 for the Xeon versus 1193 for the i3. But that parity is misleading. The head-to-head tests, which use identical workloads, show the Xeon ahead by 37% in every case. The overall averages are pulled together by different test sets and the i3's inclusion of Geekbench scores, which the Xeon does not have in the database.

For a builder choosing between these two, the decision hinges on use case. If the system needs ECC memory, server-grade reliability, or maximum threaded performance, the Xeon D-1520 is the only rational choice. If the build is a simple desktop with integrated graphics and a standard socket, and the performance deficit is acceptable, the i3-4170 can still serve. But for pure compute performance, the database shows no scenario where the i3 wins. The Xeon is the faster processor, plain and simple.