CPU Comparison
Intel Core i3-6300
Xeon X3470
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: Intel Core i3-6300 vs Intel Xeon X3470
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The Intel Core i3-6300 dominates this matchup across every recorded benchmark, winning all five head-to-head Cinebench tests. The margin is remarkably consistent, hovering around 15.5 percent in nearly every workload. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the i3-6300 scores 340 against the Xeon X3470’s 287, a 15.6 percent advantage. That same gap carries into Cinebench R20 multicore, where the i3-6300 posts 1,419 versus 1,199. The single-core results tell the same story: 200 against 169 in R20 single-core, and 477 against 403 in R23 single-core. The Xeon X3470’s best showing is in R23 multicore, where it reaches 2,857, but the i3-6300 still pulls ahead by 15.5 percent with 3,380.
The consistency of these deltas is striking. Whether the workload is single-threaded or multi-threaded, the i3-6300 holds a nearly identical lead of roughly 15.5 percent. This suggests the performance gap is architectural rather than workload-dependent. The Xeon X3470 never wins a single test, its win count stands at zero against five for the i3-6300. The average benchmark score also favors the i3-6300, albeit narrowly: 978 versus 983 for the Xeon. That 5-point difference in the aggregate metric is far smaller than the Cinebench deltas, indicating that the Xeon’s profile is more competitive in other unlisted workloads, but in the measured Cinebench suite, there is no contest.
Looking at the nearest rivals, the Xeon X3470 sits in unusual company. Its average score of 983 ties the Intel Core i3-4370T exactly, and it trails the i3-4130T and i7-875K by only 0.1 percent. The i3-6300, meanwhile, posts a 978 average, putting it 0.2 percent ahead of the i5-5257U and 0.3 percent ahead of the i3-4150T, i3-4130, and AMD Athlon X4 840. Both processors land at the 26th percentile among all CPUs, underscoring that while they differ dramatically in architecture and era, their overall standing in the current benchmark landscape is nearly identical.
Architecture Differences
The Xeon X3470 is built on Intel’s Nehalem architecture, specifically the Lynnfield die, manufactured on a 45 nm process. It contains 774 million transistors on a 296 mm² die. The i3-6300, by contrast, uses the Skylake architecture on a 14 nm process, packing 1,400 million transistors into a smaller 150 mm² die. The process shrink is the headline difference, 45 nm to 14 nm, which explains how the i3-6300 fits nearly twice the transistors in roughly half the silicon area.
The core configurations diverge significantly. The Xeon X3470 offers 4 cores and 8 threads, while the i3-6300 provides only 2 cores and 4 threads. Despite having half the physical cores, the i3-6300 still wins in multi-threaded workloads due to its superior per-core efficiency. The Xeon compensates with a larger shared L3 cache of 8 MB, double the i3-6300’s 4 MB. Both chips have the same per-core L1 and L2 cache sizes: 64 KB and 256 KB, respectively.
Memory support marks another clear generational divide. The Xeon uses DDR3 with dual-channel memory and a peak bandwidth of 21.3 GB/s. The i3-6300 moves to DDR4, also dual-channel, but with a substantially higher 34.1 GB/s bandwidth, a 60 percent improvement in theoretical memory throughput. The Xeon supports ECC memory, a server-class feature, while the i3-6300 does not. PCIe connectivity also differs: the Xeon offers Gen 2 with 16 lanes, while the i3-6300 provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes.
Integrated graphics is exclusive to the i3-6300, which includes Intel HD 530. The Xeon X3470 has no integrated graphics at all, reflecting its server/workstation positioning. Clock speeds tell another story: the Xeon runs at a 2.93 GHz base with a 3.60 GHz boost, while the i3-6300 has a higher 3.80 GHz base clock but no boost capability. The socket and platform differ completely, the Xeon uses Intel Socket 1156 and the i3-6300 uses Intel Socket 1151. The Xeon’s launch MSRP was $589; the i3-6300 has no listed launch MSRP.
Where Each One Wins
The i3-6300 wins everywhere in the measured benchmarks, making a use-case split somewhat lopsided. Its 15.5 percent lead across both single-core and multi-core Cinebench tests means it is the better choice for rendering, encoding, and general productivity workloads where Cinebench scores are representative. The single-core advantage of 200 versus 169 in R20 is particularly relevant for older software and lightly threaded applications that rely on raw clock speed. The i3-6300’s 3.80 GHz base clock, combined with the Skylake architecture’s higher instructions-per-clock, delivers a decisive edge in these scenarios.
The Xeon X3470, despite losing every benchmark, still has a theoretical use case in multi-threaded server environments. Its 8 threads, double the i3-6300’s 4, and 8 MB of L3 cache would traditionally favor heavily parallel server workloads. Additionally, ECC memory support makes it suitable for error-sensitive server deployments where data integrity is paramount. However, the benchmark data shows that even in multi-threaded Cinebench tests, the 4-core/8-thread Xeon cannot overcome the 2-core/4-thread i3-6300’s per-core efficiency. The Xeon’s 2.93 GHz base clock is substantially lower, and its 95W TDP versus the i3-6300’s 51W TDP means it consumes more power while delivering less performance.
For users with existing Intel Socket 1156 motherboards and DDR3 memory, the Xeon represents a potential drop-in upgrade path, but its end-of-life production status and 2009 release date make it a legacy part. The i3-6300, released in 2015 and still in active production, offers modern platform benefits like DDR4 support, Gen 3 PCIe, and integrated graphics, features that matter for daily desktop use. In practical terms, the i3-6300 is the clear winner for any workload captured by these benchmarks, while the Xeon’s remaining relevance is limited to niche server scenarios that value ECC memory and thread count over raw benchmark performance.
Specification Differences
The two processors differ across nearly every major specification category. Core count is the most obvious: 4 cores for the Xeon versus 2 for the i3-6300, with 8 threads versus 4. Base clocks are 2.93 GHz for the Xeon and 3.80 GHz for the i3-6300; only the Xeon has a boost clock at 3.60 GHz. The TDP gap is substantial, 95W versus 51W, reflecting the older process node and higher core count. Sockets are incompatible: Socket 1156 versus Socket 1151.
The process node is a major differentiator: 45 nm versus 14 nm. Transistor counts scale from 774 million to 1,400 million, while die size shrinks from 296 mm² to 150 mm². L3 cache is 8 MB for the Xeon and 4 MB for the i3-6300, while L1 and L2 caches are identical per core. Memory support changes from DDR3 to DDR4, with bandwidth rising from 21.3 GB/s to 34.1 GB/s. ECC memory is supported on the Xeon but not the i3-6300. PCIe generation moves from Gen 2 to Gen 3, with both offering 16 lanes. Integrated graphics is absent on the Xeon and present as Intel HD 530 on the i3-6300.
Market segments differ: the Xeon targets server/workstation, while the i3-6300 is a desktop part. Production status also differs, the Xeon is end-of-life, the i3-6300 is active. Release dates are separated by six years: September 2009 versus August 2015. The Xeon has a launch MSRP of $589; the i3-6300 has no listed launch MSRP. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not a distinguishing factor. Part numbers are SLBJH for the Xeon and SR2HA for the i3-6300.
FAQ
Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core Cinebench tests?
A: The Intel Core i3-6300 wins all multi-core benchmarks by approximately 15.5 percent. In Cinebench R15, it scores 340 versus the Xeon X3470’s 287. In R20, it scores 1,419 versus 1,199, and in R23, 3,380 versus 2,857.
Q: Does the Xeon X3470 have more cores than the i3-6300?
A: Yes. The Xeon X3470 has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the i3-6300 has 2 cores and 4 threads. Despite having half the cores, the i3-6300 still wins in multi-threaded tests due to its architectural efficiency.
Q: What is the single-core performance difference?
A: The i3-6300 leads by 15.5 percent in Cinebench R20 single-core, scoring 200 versus 169 for the Xeon. In R23 single-core, the i3-6300 scores 477 versus 403, also a 15.5 percent lead.
Q: Do these processors support ECC memory?
A: Only the Xeon X3470 supports ECC memory. The i3-6300 does not. This makes the Xeon more suitable for error-sensitive server workloads, despite its lower benchmark scores.
Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?
A: Only the Intel Core i3-6300 has integrated graphics, featuring Intel HD 530. The Xeon X3470 has no integrated graphics at all.
Q: What are the platform differences?
A: The Xeon X3470 uses Intel Socket 1156 with DDR3 memory and Gen 2 PCIe. The i3-6300 uses Intel Socket 1151 with DDR4 memory and Gen 3 PCIe. The i3-6300 also has a higher memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s versus 21.3 GB/s for the Xeon.