CPU Comparison

The Intel Core i3-7300T and Intel Xeon E5645 land on the exact same overall average benchmark score of 1211, yet they achieve that parity through completely different architectures, core counts, and performance profiles. The data shows a fascinating split: the Xeon E5645, a six-core server chip from 2010, beats the dual-core Kaby Lake desktop part in every single head-to-head Cinebench test, despite the i3-7300T being seven years newer and running at a much higher base clock.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Xeon E5645 wins all five recorded Cinebench comparisons, with the margin being remarkably consistent across every test. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 421 against the i3-7300T’s 354, a delta of -15.9 percent from the i3’s perspective. That same roughly 16 percent gap repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the Xeon posts 1758 versus 1477, and in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Xeon’s 4187 eclipses the i3’s 3519.

What is more surprising is the single-core picture. The i3-7300T runs at a 3.50 GHz base clock, while the Xeon E5645 has a 2.40 GHz base and a 2.67 GHz boost. Conventional expectation would favor the higher-clocked, newer i3 in single-threaded workloads. The data disagrees. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the Xeon scores 248 against the i3’s 208, a -16.1 percent delta. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Xeon delivers 591 to the i3’s 496, again -16.1 percent. The Xeon wins every benchmark, every mode, by essentially the same proportion.

This consistency points to a fundamental throughput advantage for the Xeon that is not tied to any single workload type. The largest single win for the Xeon in absolute terms is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it leads by 668 points. The smallest absolute gap is in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the lead is 40 points. In percentage terms, the deltas are almost identical, ranging from -15.9 to -16.1 percent. The i3-7300T has zero wins across the five tests.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon E5645 wins everywhere in the recorded benchmark suite, so the use-case split is less about which chip wins a given task and more about the nature of the workloads. For multi-threaded rendering, the Xeon’s six cores and twelve threads give it a clear edge. Cinebench R23 multi-core, which scales with thread count, shows the Xeon ahead by 16 percent. That advantage holds in R15 and R20 multi-core as well, confirming that the Xeon is the stronger choice for heavily parallel content creation.

The single-core results are the more notable finding. The i3-7300T’s higher clock speed does not translate into a win in any single-threaded test. The Xeon’s single-core scores in R20 and R23 are 16.1 percent higher. This suggests the i3-7300T does not have a niche where it outperforms the Xeon in this dataset. For users prioritizing thread-heavy server or workstation tasks, the Xeon is clearly superior. For users who might expect the i3 to win lightly threaded applications, the benchmark data contradicts that assumption.

The only area where the i3-7300T could claim an advantage outside raw compute is in platform characteristics, not benchmark scores. It supports DDR4 memory, has integrated graphics, and draws 35 watts TDP. But in terms of measured Cinebench performance, the Xeon’s victory is absolute.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from vastly different eras and design philosophies. The i3-7300T uses Kaby Lake architecture on a 14 nm process, fabricated by Intel. The Xeon E5645 uses Westmere-EP on a 32 nm process, also from Intel. The Xeon’s transistor count is listed at 1,170 million with a die size of 239 mm²; the i3-7300T has no disclosed transistor or die size data in the benchmark database.

Core and thread counts differ sharply. The i3-7300T has 2 cores and 4 threads. The Xeon E5645 has 6 cores and 12 threads. Cache hierarchies reflect this: both have 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, but the L3 cache is 4 MB shared on the i3 versus 12 MB shared on the Xeon. The Xeon’s triple the L3 is a major architectural advantage for workloads that benefit from large shared caches.

The i3-7300T has no boost clock, running at a fixed 3.50 GHz. The Xeon E5645 has a 2.40 GHz base clock and a 2.67 GHz boost clock. The i3’s clock is substantially higher, yet the Xeon still wins every benchmark. The Xeon also features ECC memory support, while the i3 does not. The i3 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD 630); the Xeon has no integrated graphics at all. The i3 supports PCIe Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes, while the Xeon is limited to PCIe Gen 2. The Xeon’s memory support is DDR3 with a triple-channel bus, versus the i3’s DDR4 with a dual-channel bus.

Specification Differences

The socket is a major divider. The i3-7300T uses Intel Socket 1151, while the Xeon E5645 uses Intel Socket 1366. These are not interchangeable platforms. The process node differs: 14 nm for the i3, 32 nm for the Xeon. The TDP is 35 watts for the i3 and 80 watts for the Xeon, a 45-watt difference that favors the i3 in power-constrained systems.

The market segment and production status also differ. The i3-7300T is a Desktop part, listed as Active production, released in January 2017. The Xeon E5645 is a Server/Workstation part, listed as End-of-life, released in March 2010. Neither has a launch MSRP in the data. The i3’s part number is SR35M; the Xeon’s is SLBWZ.

Memory bandwidth is listed for the i3 at 38.4 GB/s, with no figure given for the Xeon. The i3 supports dual-channel DDR4, while the Xeon supports triple-channel DDR3. The Xeon has ECC memory enabled; the i3 does not. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The integrated graphics presence is a clear differentiator: the i3 has Intel HD 630, the Xeon has none.

The generation labels also differ: the i3 is listed as "Core i3 (Kaby Lake)" while the Xeon is "Xeon (Westmere-EP)." The codenames are Kaby Lake for the i3 and Westmere-EP for the Xeon. The i3’s PCIe is Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Xeon’s PCIe is Gen 2 with no lane count specified.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: Both processors have exactly the same average benchmark score of 1211, and both sit at the 34th percentile versus all CPUs. Their nearest rival, the Intel Xeon E5-1607 v3, also scores 1212, just 0.1 percent higher.

Q: Does the Intel Core i3-7300T win any Cinebench benchmark?

A: No. The i3-7300T has zero wins across the five recorded head-to-head Cinebench tests. The Xeon E5645 wins all five, including both single-core and multi-core tests.

Q: How large is the Xeon E5645’s lead in multi-core performance?

A: The Xeon leads by 16 percent in Cinebench R20 multi-core (1758 versus 1477) and by 16 percent in Cinebench R23 multi-core (4187 versus 3519). In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the lead is 15.9 percent (421 versus 354).

Q: Why does the Xeon win single-core tests despite a lower clock speed?

A: The Xeon E5645 has a 2.40 GHz base clock and 2.67 GHz boost, while the i3-7300T runs at 3.50 GHz. Despite the 0.83 GHz clock disadvantage, the Xeon scores 248 versus 208 in Cinebench R20 single-core and 591 versus 496 in Cinebench R23 single-core, a 16.1 percent lead in both.

Q: What are the core and thread differences between the two?

A: The i3-7300T has 2 cores and 4 threads. The Xeon E5645 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Xeon also has 12 MB of shared L3 cache versus the i3’s 4 MB, with both having 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory and which has integrated graphics?

A: The Xeon E5645 supports ECC memory and has no integrated graphics. The i3-7300T does not support ECC memory and includes Intel HD 630 integrated graphics. The i3 uses DDR4 dual-channel memory, while the Xeon uses DDR3 triple-channel memory.