Intel Core i3-8100T vs Intel Xeon E3-1268L v5 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data is unusually one-sided here. The Intel Xeon E3-1268L v5 wins all six recorded head-to-head tests, covering both single-threaded and multi-threaded Cinebench workloads. There is no test in the database where the Core i3-8100T comes out ahead.

The Xeon's advantage is consistent across every workload category. In multi-threaded rendering, where its 8 threads can flex against the i3's 4 threads, it leads by roughly 20% in every Cinebench version. In single-threaded tests, the margin is nearly identical, which is more surprising. The i3-8100T has a higher base clock at 3.10 GHz compared to the Xeon's 2.40 GHz, yet the Xeon still manages a 20% single-core lead. This suggests the Xeon's 3.40 GHz boost clock and architectural differences are doing significant work.

The Core i3-8100T does have one advantage not visible in the head-to-head table: it has a Geekbench score in its own benchmark list (3142 multi-core, 1104 single-core). The Xeon has no recorded Geekbench result, so the i3 is the only one of the two with data in that test. However, the database does not provide a direct comparison, and the i3's overall percentile ranking (38th) sits just below the Xeon's (39th).

For users prioritizing rendering workloads, the Xeon is the clear pick. For those who need Geekbench-specific validation, the i3 has the only recorded numbers. But in raw Cinebench performance, the Xeon dominates every single test.

Architecture Differences

Both CPUs are built on Intel's 14 nm process, but they come from different architecture families. The Xeon E3-1268L v5 is Skylake-DT, part of the Xeon E3 lineup. The Core i3-8100T is Coffee Lake, a later refinement of the same process generation.

The most significant architectural split is threading. The Xeon offers 4 cores and 8 threads, while the i3-8100T offers 4 cores and 4 threads. This is the single biggest factor behind the multi-core performance gap. The Xeon can process two threads per core, which directly helps in heavily threaded Cinebench workloads.

Cache allocation also differs. The Xeon carries 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i3 has 6 MB. Both share the same per-core L1 and L2 configuration: 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core. The extra 2 MB of L3 on the Xeon gives it more room for frequently accessed data.

Memory support is another differentiator. The Xeon supports both DDR3 and DDR4, while the i3 supports DDR4 only. Both run dual-channel memory buses. The i3 actually has a higher peak memory bandwidth at 38.4 GB/s versus the Xeon's 34.1 GB/s, but the Xeon's ECC memory support (both CPUs support ECC, per the data) and broader memory compatibility give it more flexibility in workstation environments.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The Xeon uses HD Graphics P530, while the i3 uses UHD Graphics 630. The i3's graphics are from a newer generation, but the database does not provide comparative graphics benchmarks.

The Xeon has a larger die at 122 mm² with 1,750 million transistors. The i3 has a slightly larger die at 126 mm², but no transistor count is recorded. Both use the same Intel Socket 1151 and offer PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU.

There is no multiplier unlock on either chip, so overclocking is not a supported feature on either part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data covers six Cinebench tests, and the Xeon wins all of them. The margins are remarkably consistent, hovering around 20% in every case.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 542 against the i3's 450, a 20.4% advantage. The single-core R15 test shows 76 versus 63, a 20.6% lead. Moving to Cinebench R20, the Xeon posts 2260 multi-core versus 1876, a 20.5% gap, and 319 single-core versus 264, a 20.8% lead. Cinebench R23 shows 5383 versus 4467 in multi-core, 20.5% ahead, and 760 versus 630 in single-core, 20.6% ahead.

The consistency of these deltas is notable. A roughly 20% advantage across every test, regardless of workload type, points to a fundamental performance differential rather than a workload-specific quirk. The i3's higher base clock (3.10 GHz versus 2.40 GHz) does not translate into a win anywhere, because the Xeon's boost clock reaches 3.40 GHz and its extra threads help in multi-core scenarios.

Looking at the broader database context, the Xeon's average benchmark score is 1557, which places it in the 39th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD FX-8350 at an identical 1557 score, the Core i3-1115G4E at 1559 (0.1% behind), and the Opteron 6276 at 1560 (0.2% behind). The i3-8100T, meanwhile, averages 1500, ranked 38th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the Core i7-3770S at 1498 (0.1% behind), the Core i5-4590S at 1493 (0.5% behind), and the Opteron 6344 at 1492 (0.6% behind). The Xeon sits slightly higher in overall CPU rankings, but both are in the same general performance tier.

The i3 does have a Geekbench result (3142 multi-core, 1104 single-core) that is not part of the head-to-head table. This is the only benchmark category where the i3 has recorded data and the Xeon does not, so users who rely on Geekbench specifically should note that only the i3 has a verifiable score.

Specification Differences

The two CPUs differ in several recorded specifications:

• Threads: Xeon has 8, i3 has 4.
• Base clock: Xeon at 2.40 GHz, i3 at 3.10 GHz.
• Boost clock: Xeon at 3.40 GHz, i3 has no boost clock recorded.
• L3 cache: Xeon has 8 MB shared, i3 has 6 MB shared.
• Memory support: Xeon supports DDR3 and DDR4, i3 supports DDR4 only.
• Memory bandwidth: Xeon at 34.1 GB/s, i3 at 38.4 GB/s.
• Integrated graphics: Xeon has HD Graphics P530, i3 has UHD Graphics 630.
• Architecture: Xeon is Skylake-DT, i3 is Coffee Lake.
• Die size: Xeon at 122 mm², i3 at 126 mm².
• Transistors: Xeon at 1,750 million, i3 has no recorded count.
• Market segment: Xeon is server/workstation, i3 is desktop.
• Release date: Xeon in October 2015, i3 in April 2018.
• Part number: Xeon SR2LQ, i3 SR3Y8.
• Launch MSRP: Xeon $377, i3 $117.

Both CPUs share the same core count (4), TDP (35 watts), socket (Intel Socket 1151), process node (14 nm), L1/L2 cache configuration (64 KB and 256 KB per core), PCIe configuration (Gen 3, 16 lanes), memory bus (dual-channel), ECC support (both true), and production status (end-of-life). Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The Xeon E3-1268L v5 wins all three multi-core Cinebench tests. It leads by 20.4% in R15, 20.5% in R20, and 20.5% in R23. Its 8 threads versus the i3's 4 threads is the primary reason.

Q: Is the Core i3-8100T ever faster in single-threaded tests?

A: No. The Xeon leads in all three single-core Cinebench tests: R15 by 20.6%, R20 by 20.8%, and R23 by 20.6%. The i3's higher base clock (3.10 GHz versus 2.40 GHz) does not produce a win.

Q: Do both CPUs support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the database records ECC memory support as true for both the Xeon E3-1268L v5 and the Core i3-8100T.

Q: What memory types can each CPU use?

A: The Xeon supports both DDR3 and DDR4, while the i3 supports DDR4 only. Both use dual-channel memory buses.

Q: Which CPU has more L3 cache?

A: The Xeon has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i3 has 6 MB. Both have 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core.

Q: How do these CPUs compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The Xeon scores 1557 on average, matching the AMD FX-8350 exactly and sitting 0.1% behind the Core i3-1115G4E. The i3 averages 1500, sitting 0.1% ahead of the Core i7-3770S and 0.5% ahead of the Core i5-4590S.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Xeon E3-1268L v5 is the faster processor in every recorded benchmark category. It wins all six Cinebench tests by roughly 20%, and that margin holds for both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads. The Xeon's 8 threads, larger 8 MB L3 cache, and 3.40 GHz boost clock collectively overcome the i3's higher 3.10 GHz base clock.

The Core i3-8100T does have one thing the Xeon lacks: a recorded Geekbench score. If Geekbench is the benchmark you care about, the i3 is the only one of these two with verifiable numbers (3142 multi-core, 1104 single-core). It also has a higher memory bandwidth (38.4 GB/s versus 34.1 GB/s) and newer integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630 versus HD Graphics P530).

The Xeon targets server and workstation workloads, and its specifications reflect that: ECC memory support, DDR3/DDR4 compatibility, and a 35-watt TDP with 8 threads. The i3 is a desktop part with a lower launch MSRP ($117 versus $377), but the database's performance rankings place the Xeon slightly higher in overall CPU percentile (39th versus 38th).

For a rendering or workstation build where Cinebench performance matters, the Xeon is the better choice. For a desktop build where Geekbench is the primary metric, the i3 at least offers recorded data in that test. For everything else in the benchmark suite, the Xeon wins outright. Both CPUs are end-of-life, so availability and platform considerations will matter, but strictly from the recorded data, the Xeon E3-1268L v5 is the stronger performer.