Intel Core i3-4370T vs Intel Xeon X3470 Comparison

Intel Xeon X3470 and Intel Core i3-4370T land on identical average benchmark scores of 983, placing both at the 26th percentile among all CPUs. The two processors are separated by roughly six years of architecture evolution, yet the data shows a statistical dead heat across every measured Cinebench workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are remarkable for their uniformity. In Cinebench R15 multicore, both chips score exactly 287 points, a perfect tie with a delta of 0%. The pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multicore, where both produce 1199 points. Even the single-core tests show no separation: R20 single-core yields 169 for both, and R23 single-core yields 403 for both.

The only observable difference appears in Cinebench R23 multicore, where the Xeon X3470 scores 2857 against the i3-4370T’s 2856. That one-point margin translates to a deltaPct of 0%, meaning the difference is effectively a rounding artifact rather than a measurable performance gap. The Xeon is credited with all five head-to-head wins, but every single result is a tie or within one point.

This is unusual because the two chips have fundamentally different configurations. The Xeon X3470 brings 4 cores and 8 threads, while the i3-4370T operates with 2 cores and 4 threads. The Xeon’s additional physical cores and hyper-threading should theoretically give it a multicore advantage, yet the benchmark data shows the i3’s newer architecture closes the gap completely.

In single-threaded workloads, the i3-4370T’s 3.30 GHz base clock (with no boost capability) outperforms expectations against the Xeon’s 2.93 GHz base and 3.60 GHz boost. The 403-point R23 single-core score for both chips implies that the i3’s Haswell architecture delivers higher instructions-per-clock than the Xeon’s Nehalem design, offsetting the Xeon’s higher peak frequency.

The nearest rival data reinforces this equilibrium. Both chips share identical nearestRivals lists: the Core i3-4130T sits at 984 with a -0.1% deltaPct, the Core i7-875K also sits at 984 with -0.1%, and the Xeon W5590 sits at 986 with -0.3%. This cluster of scores within a 3-point range suggests these processors all deliver comparable real-world Cinebench throughput despite their architectural differences.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two is substantial. The Xeon X3470 uses the Nehalem architecture on the Lynnfield codename, built on a 45 nm process node. The i3-4370T uses Haswell architecture, built on a 22 nm process. That process shrink allowed Intel to pack 1,400 million transistors into a 177 mm² die for the i3, versus 774 million transistors across 296 mm² for the Xeon.

The Xeon’s Lynnfield design relies on a larger die to accommodate 4 physical cores and 8 threads. The i3’s Haswell design achieves comparable throughput with only 2 cores and 4 threads, indicating that Haswell’s per-core efficiency is roughly double that of Nehalem in these workloads. The i3’s transistor density is substantially higher, which contributes to its ability to match the Xeon’s multicore scores despite having half the cores.

Cache configurations differ in total capacity but not in per-core allocation. Both chips offer 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core. The Xeon provides 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i3 provides 4 MB of shared L3 cache. The Xeon’s larger L3 pool reflects its server/workstation positioning, but the benchmark results show this capacity advantage does not translate into a performance lead in Cinebench.

Memory support is another differentiator. Both support DDR3 in dual-channel mode, but the i3-4370T achieves 25.6 GB/s memory bandwidth versus the Xeon’s 21.3 GB/s. The i3 also supports PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes, whereas the Xeon is limited to PCIe Gen 2 with 16 lanes. The i3 includes integrated Intel HD 4600 graphics; the Xeon has no integrated graphics at all.

ECC memory support marks the Xeon as server-class hardware, while the i3 lacks it. The Xeon’s market segment is listed as Server/Workstation, and the i3’s as Desktop. The Xeon uses the older Intel Socket 1156, while the i3 uses Intel Socket 1150, meaning these processors are not interchangeable in any motherboard.

The Verdict

From a pure performance standpoint, the data shows no reason to prefer either processor in Cinebench workloads. The Xeon X3470 and i3-4370T produce statistically identical scores across all five tested scenarios, with average benchmark scores of 983 for each.

The Xeon X3470 is the appropriate choice for workloads that require ECC memory support or the server/workstation feature set. Its 4-core, 8-thread configuration with 8 MB of L3 cache and 21.3 GB/s memory bandwidth suits environments where data integrity and multi-threaded capacity matter. The i3-4370T, with its 35W TDP versus the Xeon’s 95W TDP, offers dramatically lower power consumption. The i3 also provides integrated graphics, which the Xeon lacks entirely.

For desktop users building a system from the Socket 1150 platform, the i3-4370T delivers the same Cinebench performance as the Xeon while consuming less than half the power. The Xeon’s Socket 1156 platform is older and end-of-life, as is the i3’s Socket 1150, so neither offers a future upgrade path. The i3’s PCIe Gen 3 support and higher memory bandwidth give it a slight platform-level edge for modern peripherals.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon X3470 | Intel Core i3-4370T |

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

| Cores | 4 | 2 |

| Threads | 8 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 2.93 GHz | 3.30 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.60 GHz | None |

| TDP | 95W | 35W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1156 | Intel Socket 1150 |

| Architecture | Nehalem | Haswell |

| Codename | Lynnfield | Haswell |

| Process Node | 45 nm | 22 nm |

| Transistors | 774 million | 1,400 million |

| Die Size | 296 mm² | 177 mm² |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | 4 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 21.3 GB/s | 25.6 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 2, 16 Lanes | Gen 3, 16 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | None | Intel HD 4600 |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2009-09-07 | 2015-03-29 |

| Launch MSRP | $589 | $138 |

FAQ

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

A: The data shows no difference. Both score 169 in Cinebench R20 single-core and 403 in Cinebench R23 single-core, with the head-to-head listing a 0% delta for both tests.

Q: Do the extra cores on the Xeon X3470 help in multicore workloads?

A: No. Despite having 4 cores and 8 threads versus the i3’s 2 cores and 4 threads, the Xeon scores 287 in Cinebench R15 multicore, identical to the i3. The one-point difference in Cinebench R23 multicore (2857 vs 2856) is negligible.

Q: Can these two processors be used in the same motherboard?

A: No. The Xeon X3470 uses Intel Socket 1156, while the i3-4370T uses Intel Socket 1150. They are physically incompatible with each other’s platforms.

Q: Which processor has lower power consumption?

A: The i3-4370T has a TDP of 35W, compared to the Xeon X3470’s 95W. This makes the i3 significantly more power-efficient.

Q: Does the Xeon X3470 have integrated graphics?

A: No. The Xeon X3470 has no integrated graphics, while the i3-4370T includes Intel HD 4600 graphics.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor?

A: Both processors have an identical average benchmark score of 983, placing them both at the 26th percentile among all CPUs. Their nearest rival, the Intel Core i3-4130T, scores 984 with a -0.1% deltaPct.