Intel Core i3-4330 vs Intel Xeon W5580 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a remarkably consistent picture across all five Cinebench tests. The Intel Core i3-4330 wins every single head-to-head matchup, though the margins are consistently narrow. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the i3-4330 scores 298 against the Xeon W5580's 296, a 0.7% lead. The R20 multicore test shows the same pattern: 1245 for the i3-4330 versus 1234 for the Xeon, a 0.9% edge. The single-core tests tell the same story, with the i3-4330 taking R20 single-core at 175 versus 174 (0.6% ahead) and R23 single-core at 418 versus 415 (0.7% ahead).

The largest margin in the entire comparison is 0.9%, which appears twice: in Cinebench R20 multicore and Cinebench R23 multicore. That is a meaningful observation because the Xeon W5580 has double the cores and double the threads. The i3-4330 has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the Xeon W5580 has 4 cores and 8 threads. Despite the Xeon's hardware advantage in raw core count, the i3-4330 still edges it out in every recorded workload.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this. The i3-4330 averages 1020 across its benchmark suite, while the Xeon W5580 averages 1012. That 8-point gap is small but consistent with the individual test results. Both processors sit at the 28th percentile among all CPUs in the database, meaning they occupy effectively the same performance tier. The database records 5 wins for the i3-4330 and 0 wins for the Xeon W5580 in their direct head-to-head tests.

The Xeon W5580's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-2675QM with an identical average score of 1012, and the Intel Core i5-2300 at 1014, which is 0.2% ahead. The i3-4330's nearest rivals include the Intel Pentium Gold G5600 at 1022 (0.2% ahead of the i3), the Intel Core i7-975 at 1023 (0.3% ahead), and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U at 1024 (0.3% ahead). The i3-4330 also sits 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core i3-4160, which scores 1017. These rival comparisons show that both processors are clustered in a very tight performance band, where a few points separate entire product generations.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most benchmark tests in the head-to-head comparison?

A: The Intel Core i3-4330 wins all five recorded tests. It leads in Cinebench R15 multicore (298 vs 296), R20 multicore (1245 vs 1234), R20 single-core (175 vs 174), R23 multicore (2966 vs 2940), and R23 single-core (418 vs 415).

Q: Does the Xeon W5580's higher core count translate into better multicore performance?

A: No. Despite having 4 cores and 8 threads versus the i3-4330's 2 cores and 4 threads, the Xeon W5580 scores lower in every multicore test. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the i3-4330 scores 2966 while the Xeon scores 2940.

Q: How do the two processors compare in single-core performance?

A: The i3-4330 is ahead in both single-core tests. It scores 175 versus 174 in Cinebench R20 single-core and 418 versus 415 in Cinebench R23 single-core. The margins are 0.6% and 0.7% respectively.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each processor?

A: The i3-4330 has an average benchmark score of 1020, while the Xeon W5580 has an average of 1012. Both processors sit at the 28th percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Q: What memory features does each processor support?

A: The i3-4330 uses dual-channel DDR3 memory and does not support ECC. The Xeon W5580 uses triple-channel DDR3 memory with a recorded memory bandwidth of 32.0 GB/s and supports ECC memory.

Q: What is the production status of the Xeon W5580?

A: The Xeon W5580 is marked as end-of-life in the database. The i3-4330 has no recorded end-of-life status.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations. The Intel Core i3-4330 uses the Haswell architecture on a 22 nm process node, with a die size of 177 mm² and 1,400 million transistors. The Intel Xeon W5580 uses the Nehalem architecture, specifically the Gainestown codename, on a 45 nm process node, with a die size of 263 mm² and 731 million transistors. The i3-4330's smaller process node allows it to pack nearly twice as many transistors into a smaller die, which helps explain how it keeps pace with a processor that has twice the core count.

Cache configurations also differ. Both processors share the same L1 cache size at 64 KB per core and the same L2 cache at 256 KB per core, but the L3 cache differs significantly. The i3-4330 has 4 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Xeon W5580 has 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The Xeon's larger L3 cache is likely a response to its higher core count, but the benchmark data indicates that this cache advantage does not translate into a performance win.

The PCI Express support differs as well. The i3-4330 uses PCIe Gen 3, while the Xeon W5580 uses PCIe Gen 2. The i3-4330 also includes integrated graphics in the form of Intel HD 4600, while the Xeon W5580 has no integrated graphics at all. This reflects their different market segments: the i3-4330 is a desktop processor, while the Xeon W5580 is aimed at server and workstation use.

Memory architecture is another major difference. The i3-4330 supports dual-channel DDR3 memory, while the Xeon W5580 supports triple-channel DDR3 memory with a recorded bandwidth of 32.0 GB/s. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, which is absent on the i3-4330. ECC support is a typical server requirement, and its presence on the Xeon W5580 aligns with its workstation positioning. The Xeon's triple-channel memory controller gives it a theoretical memory bandwidth advantage, but the benchmark results show that this does not produce a win in the tested Cinebench workloads.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts are the most obvious specification difference. The i3-4330 has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the Xeon W5580 has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Xeon offers double the parallel execution resources on paper.

Base clock speeds differ slightly. The i3-4330 runs at 3.50 GHz with no boost clock recorded. The Xeon W5580 runs at 3.20 GHz base with a 3.47 GHz boost clock. The i3-4330's higher base clock likely contributes to its single-core wins, since it does not need to rely on boost behavior to reach its operating frequency.

Thermal design power differs substantially. The i3-4330 has a TDP of 54 watts, while the Xeon W5580 has a TDP of 130 watts. The Xeon consumes more than twice the power budget, which is consistent with its older process node and higher core count.

Sockets are incompatible. The i3-4330 uses Intel Socket 1150, while the Xeon W5580 uses Intel Socket 1366. This means a motherboard upgrade is required to move between these two platforms. The release dates also differ significantly, with the i3-4330 released in August 2013 and the Xeon W5580 released in March 2009. The launch MSRP of the Xeon W5580 was $1600, while no launch MSRP is recorded for the i3-4330.

The memory bus width differs: dual-channel on the i3-4330 versus triple-channel on the Xeon W5580. The Xeon supports ECC memory and has a recorded memory bandwidth of 32.0 GB/s, while the i3-4330 has no ECC support and no recorded memory bandwidth figure. The integrated graphics difference is also notable: the i3-4330 includes Intel HD 4600, while the Xeon W5580 has no integrated graphics. The i3-4330 uses PCIe Gen 3, while the Xeon W5580 uses PCIe Gen 2. The part numbers are SR1NM for the i3-4330 and SLBF2 for the Xeon W5580. The production status of the Xeon W5580 is end-of-life, while no such status is recorded for the i3-4330.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i3-4330 wins in every benchmark category recorded in the database. Its strengths are most apparent in single-core workloads, where its 3.50 GHz base clock and newer Haswell architecture give it a consistent edge. The margins in single-core tests are 0.6% in Cinebench R20 and 0.7% in Cinebench R23. These are small wins, but they are wins nonetheless.

The i3-4330 also wins in multicore workloads despite having half the cores of the Xeon W5580. In Cinebench R15 multicore, it scores 298 versus 296. In Cinebench R20 multicore, it scores 1245 versus 1234. In Cinebench R23 multicore, it scores 2966 versus 2940. The largest multicore margin is 0.9%, which appears in both R20 and R23. The i3-4330's 22 nm process node and higher base clock appear to compensate for its core count disadvantage.

The Xeon W5580's advantages are not reflected in benchmark scores but in platform features. It supports triple-channel DDR3 memory with a recorded bandwidth of 32.0 GB/s, which can benefit memory-bandwidth-sensitive workloads that are not captured by the Cinebench suite. It also supports ECC memory, which is important for data integrity in server and workstation environments. Its 8 MB of shared L3 cache doubles the i3-4330's 4 MB, which could help in workloads with large working sets. The Xeon is also a server-class processor, so its platform supports features like registered memory that the desktop-oriented i3-4330 cannot use. The Xeon's end-of-life production status is a consideration for anyone planning a new build, though it does not affect its recorded performance.

For general desktop use, the i3-4330 is the better choice. It offers integrated graphics, a lower TDP of 54 watts versus 130 watts, and slightly better performance in every recorded test. It also uses the newer PCIe Gen 3 interface. For server or workstation use where ECC memory and triple-channel bandwidth are requirements, the Xeon W5580 has the feature set that matters, even if its benchmark scores are slightly lower.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i3-4330 outperforms the Intel Xeon W5580 in every recorded Cinebench test. The margins are small, ranging from 0.6% to 0.9%, but they are consistent across all five benchmarks. The i3-4330 achieves this with 2 cores and 4 threads against the Xeon's 4 cores and 8 threads, which speaks to the efficiency of the Haswell architecture on a 22 nm process node compared to Nehalem on 45 nm.

The i3-4330 is the pick for anyone building a desktop system. It has integrated graphics, a much lower TDP of 54 watts versus 130 watts, PCIe Gen 3 support, and a higher base clock of 3.50 GHz. Its average benchmark score of 1020 places it slightly ahead of the Xeon's 1012. The i3-4330 sits at the 28th percentile among all CPUs, the same as the Xeon, but it gets there with less power and fewer cores.

The Xeon W5580 is only the right choice if the platform features are non-negotiable. Its triple-channel DDR3 memory with 32.0 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support make it suitable for workstation memory integrity. Its 8 MB of shared L3 cache doubles the i3-4330's 4 MB, and its 4 cores and 8 threads provide more parallel resources. However, its end-of-life production status, 130 watt TDP, older PCIe Gen 2 interface, and higher launch MSRP of $1600 make it difficult to recommend for any workload where the i3-4330's feature set suffices. The database records 5 wins for the i3-4330 and 0 for the Xeon W5580. The verdict follows the data.