Intel Core i3-5157U vs Intel Xeon W3520 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon W3520 has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core i3-5157U has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: What is the difference in process node between the two?

A: The Intel Core i3-5157U is built on a 14 nm process, while the Intel Xeon W3520 uses a 45 nm process. The i3-5157U also has a smaller die size at 133 mm² compared to 263 mm² for the Xeon W3520.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Xeon W3520 supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core i3-5157U does not.

Q: What is the memory bus configuration for each processor?

A: The Intel Core i3-5157U uses a dual-channel memory bus, while the Intel Xeon W3520 uses a triple-channel memory bus. The i3-5157U has a recorded memory bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s; no bandwidth figure is recorded for the Xeon W3520.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core i3-5157U includes Intel Iris 6100 integrated graphics. The Intel Xeon W3520 has no integrated graphics.

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

A: The Intel Core i3-5157U has an average benchmark score of 877, while the Intel Xeon W3520 has an average benchmark score of 862. Both sit at the 23rd percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural eras. The Intel Core i3-5157U is based on the Broadwell architecture with the Broadwell-U codename, belonging to the Core i3 generation. It uses a 14 nm process node with 1,900 million transistors on a 133 mm² die. The Intel Xeon W3520 is based on the older Nehalem architecture with the Bloomfield codename, part of the Xeon generation. It uses a 45 nm process with 731 million transistors on a larger 263 mm² die.

The core configuration differs significantly. The i3-5157U has 2 physical cores with 4 threads, while the Xeon W3520 doubles that to 4 physical cores with 8 threads. Both processors share the same per-core L1 cache of 64 KB and per-core L2 cache of 256 KB. The shared L3 cache, however, is much larger on the Xeon W3520 at 8 MB compared to 3 MB on the i3-5157U.

The memory architecture also sets them apart. The i3-5157U supports dual-channel DDR3 memory with a recorded bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s. The Xeon W3520 supports triple-channel DDR3 memory, though no bandwidth figure is recorded in the database. ECC memory support is present on the Xeon W3520 but absent on the i3-5157U.

The i3-5157U includes Intel Iris 6100 integrated graphics, making it suitable for systems without a discrete GPU. The Xeon W3520 has no integrated graphics, requiring a separate graphics card. The i3-5157U uses an Intel BGA 1168 socket with 12 PCIe Gen 2 lanes (CPU only), while the Xeon W3520 uses Intel Socket 1366 with PCIe Gen 2 support. The market segments differ: the i3-5157U targets mobile devices, while the Xeon W3520 targets server and workstation platforms.

The transistor counts and die sizes reflect their manufacturing technologies. The i3-5157U packs more transistors (1,900 million) into a smaller die (133 mm²) thanks to the 14 nm process. The Xeon W3520 uses fewer transistors (731 million) on a much larger die (263 mm²) due to the older 45 nm process. The Xeon W3520 has a higher TDP of 130, while the i3-5157U draws only 28.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data shows a clear split between the two processors. The Intel Xeon W3520 wins all five head-to-head benchmark comparisons, giving it a decisive advantage across every recorded test. The Intel Core i3-5157U does not win a single benchmark in the head-to-head set.

The Xeon W3520's advantage comes primarily from its higher core and thread count. With 4 cores and 8 threads versus 2 cores and 4 threads, the Xeon W3520 has double the parallel processing capacity. This shows up in multi-core workloads, where it leads by roughly 12% in every Cinebench multi-core test.

The Xeon W3520 also wins in single-core tests, despite the i3-5157U having a newer architecture. The Xeon W3520's higher base clock of 2.67 GHz, plus a boost clock of 2.93 GHz, helps it outperform the i3-5157U's 2.50 GHz base clock with no boost. The i3-5157U's newer 14 nm process and Broadwell architecture do not overcome the clock speed deficit.

For users running multi-threaded applications like video rendering, 3D modeling, or server workloads, the Xeon W3520 is the clear choice. Its 8 threads and larger 8 MB L3 cache provide more room for parallel tasks. The i3-5157U, with its integrated Iris 6100 graphics and lower TDP, suits mobile or compact systems where power efficiency and graphics capability matter more than raw compute throughput.

The i3-5157U's strengths lie outside the benchmark suite. Its integrated graphics eliminate the need for a separate GPU, and its 28 TDP makes it far more power-efficient than the 130 TDP Xeon W3520. These factors matter for portable or low-power systems, even though they do not show up in the recorded CPU benchmarks.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification category.

• Cores: The i3-5157U has 2 cores; the Xeon W3520 has 4 cores.
• Threads: The i3-5157U has 4 threads; the Xeon W3520 has 8 threads.
• Base clock: The i3-5157U runs at 2.50 GHz; the Xeon W3520 runs at 2.67 GHz.
• Boost clock: The i3-5157U has no boost clock; the Xeon W3520 boosts to 2.93 GHz.
• TDP: The i3-5157U draws 28; the Xeon W3520 draws 130.
• Socket: The i3-5157U uses Intel BGA 1168; the Xeon W3520 uses Intel Socket 1366.
• Architecture: The i3-5157U is Broadwell; the Xeon W3520 is Nehalem.
• Process node: The i3-5157U uses 14 nm; the Xeon W3520 uses 45 nm.
• Transistors: The i3-5157U has 1,900 million; the Xeon W3520 has 731 million.
• Die size: The i3-5157U is 133 mm²; the Xeon W3520 is 263 mm².
• L3 cache: The i3-5157U has 3 MB shared; the Xeon W3520 has 8 MB shared.
• Memory bus: The i3-5157U is dual-channel; the Xeon W3520 is triple-channel.
• Memory bandwidth: The i3-5157U has 29.9 GB/s; the Xeon W3520 has no recorded figure.
• ECC memory: The i3-5157U does not support it; the Xeon W3520 supports it.
• PCIe: The i3-5157U has Gen 2, 12 Lanes (CPU only); the Xeon W3520 has Gen 2.
• Integrated graphics: The i3-5157U has Intel Iris 6100; the Xeon W3520 has none.
• Market segment: The i3-5157U is mobile; the Xeon W3520 is server/workstation.
• Release date: The i3-5157U launched later; the Xeon W3520 launched earlier.
• Launch MSRP: The i3-5157U has a launch MSRP of $315; the Xeon W3520 has no recorded launch MSRP.
• Part number: The i3-5157U is SR26M; the Xeon W3520 is SLBEW.

The i3-5157U's newer process node gives it efficiency advantages, while the Xeon W3520 compensates with more cores, more cache, and higher clocks.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records five head-to-head benchmark comparisons, and the Intel Xeon W3520 wins all five. The margins are consistent, ranging from 11.9% to 12.2% in favor of the Xeon W3520.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon W3520 scores 252 against 222 for the i3-5157U, a delta of -11.9% from the i3-5157U's perspective. This is the smallest margin in the set. The Xeon W3520's 4 cores and 8 threads give it a clear edge in this rendering workload.

Cinebench R20 multi-core shows a similar pattern. The Xeon W3520 scores 1052, while the i3-5157U scores 925, resulting in a -12.1% delta. The absolute difference of 127 points is the largest gap in the multi-core tests.

In Cinebench R20 single-core, the Xeon W3520 scores 148 against 130 for the i3-5157U, a -12.2% delta. This is the largest percentage margin in the entire comparison. The Xeon W3520's higher base clock and boost clock overcome the i3-5157U's architectural advantages.

Cinebench R23 multi-core continues the trend. The Xeon W3520 scores 2505, while the i3-5157U scores 2203, a -12.1% delta. The absolute difference of 302 points is the largest in any test.

Cinebench R23 single-core rounds out the set. The Xeon W3520 scores 353 against 311 for the i3-5157U, a -11.9% delta. This matches the R15 multi-core margin as the smallest difference.

The consistency of these margins is notable. Every test shows the Xeon W3520 ahead by roughly 12%, regardless of whether the workload is single-core or multi-core. This suggests the Xeon W3520's advantage comes from its higher clock speeds and additional cores working together, rather than from any single architectural feature.

The i3-5157U has no wins in the head-to-head set. Its 2 cores and 4 threads, combined with a lower base clock and no boost, place it behind the Xeon W3520 in every recorded benchmark.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a straightforward conclusion: the Intel Xeon W3520 outperforms the Intel Core i3-5157U across every recorded CPU benchmark. With a 5-0 win record in head-to-head comparisons, the Xeon W3520 is the stronger processor for raw compute performance.

The Xeon W3520's advantages are structural. It has double the cores and double the threads, a higher base clock, a boost clock, and more than double the L3 cache. These factors contribute to its consistent 12% lead in both single-core and multi-core workloads.

However, the i3-5157U offers features that matter outside the benchmark suite. Its integrated Intel Iris 6100 graphics make it a complete package for systems without discrete GPUs. Its 28 TDP is dramatically lower than the Xeon W3520's 130, making it suitable for power-constrained mobile designs. The i3-5157U also uses a newer 14 nm process, which contributes to its efficiency.

The Xeon W3520 targets server and workstation platforms. Its ECC memory support and triple-channel memory bus align with enterprise requirements. The i3-5157U targets mobile systems, where its integrated graphics and low power draw are critical.

For users who prioritize multi-threaded rendering, server workloads, or any task that scales with cores and threads, the Xeon W3520 is the clear pick. Its 8 threads and 8 MB L3 cache provide the parallel capacity that such workloads demand.

For users who need a compact, low-power system with integrated graphics, the i3-5157U is the appropriate choice, despite its benchmark deficit. The data shows the Xeon W3520 wins every performance test, but the i3-5157U's feature set serves a different use case.

Both processors sit at the 23rd percentile among all CPUs, indicating they are in the lower performance tier overall. The Xeon W3520's average benchmark score of 862 is slightly lower than the i3-5157U's 877, but the head-to-head results show the Xeon W3520 winning all five direct comparisons. This discrepancy highlights that average scores across different benchmark suites can differ from direct comparisons.

The verdict from the data: choose the Xeon W3520 for maximum CPU performance and server features. Choose the i3-5157U for mobile efficiency and integrated graphics, accepting lower benchmark scores in exchange for those capabilities.