Intel Core i3-8130U vs Intel Xeon W5590 Comparison

The Intel Core i3-8130U and the Intel Xeon W5590 target entirely different eras and market segments, yet their benchmark results land them surprisingly close together. The i3-8130U, a modern 14 nm mobile dual-core, wins every single head-to-head benchmark in the data, albeit by narrow margins. The Xeon W5590, a 45 nm server/workstation part from 2009, fights back with double the cores and threads, but its older architecture cannot overcome the i3’s per-clock efficiency. The data shows a consistent 4-5% advantage for the i3 across all tested workloads, making this a fascinating study in how process node and IPC evolution can offset raw core-count disadvantages in legacy applications.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are remarkably one-sided. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i3-8130U scores 301 against the Xeon W5590’s 288, a 4.5% lead. The same pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the i3 posts 1257 versus 1204, a 4.4% difference. Even in Cinebench R23 multi-core, the most demanding test in the set, the i3 manages 2995 while the Xeon reaches 2867 — another 4.5% gap. Across all five shared benchmarks, the i3-8130U wins decisively, securing a 5-0 sweep with zero wins for the Xeon.

The single-core results tell the same story, confirming that the i3’s advantage is not merely about thread scheduling or multi-threaded scaling. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i3 scores 177 versus 169, a 4.7% lead — the largest margin in the entire comparison. Cinebench R23 single-core shows the i3 at 422 against the Xeon’s 404, a 4.5% edge. This consistency across both multi-core and single-core tests indicates that the i3’s newer Kaby Lake architecture delivers superior instructions-per-clock, allowing its two physical cores to outperform the Xeon’s four older cores in every scenario. The Xeon’s higher base clock of 3.33 GHz and boost of 3.60 GHz cannot compensate for the architectural deficit, as the i3’s 2.40 GHz base and 3.40 GHz boost prove more effective in practice.

It is importantly the average benchmark scores place these two CPUs in the same percentile bracket. The i3-8130U holds a 27th percentile rank among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 994. The Xeon W5590 also sits at the 27th percentile, with an average score of 986. Their nearest rivals further illustrate this parity: the i3 is within 0.1% of the AMD Phenom II X6 1065T and the Intel Xeon W3565, while the Xeon is within 0.2-0.3% of the Intel Core i7-875K and the Intel Core i3-4130T. This means that while the i3 wins every direct comparison, the overall performance class is essentially identical — a modern ultra-low-power laptop chip and a decade-old workstation behemoth occupy the same performance tier in these legacy benchmarks.

Architecture Differences

The architectural chasm between these two processors explains the benchmark results. The i3-8130U is built on Intel’s 14 nm process node with a die size of 123 mm², using the Kaby Lake architecture (specifically Kaby Lake-R). The Xeon W5590, by contrast, uses the 45 nm node with a die size of 263 mm², based on the Nehalem architecture (codename Gainestown). The Xeon also carries 731 million transistors, a figure not listed for the i3, reflecting the older, less dense manufacturing process.

Core and thread counts differ significantly. The i3-8130U has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the Xeon W5590 doubles that with 4 cores and 8 threads. Cache hierarchies also diverge: both share 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, but the i3 has 4 MB of shared L3 cache, whereas the Xeon offers 8 MB of shared L3. Despite having half the cores and half the L3 cache, the i3 still wins, which underscores the efficiency of the newer architecture.

Memory support is another major differentiator. The i3-8130U supports DDR4 memory with no ECC capability, while the Xeon W5590 supports DDR3 with triple-channel memory and a memory bandwidth of 32.0 GB/s. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the i3. PCIe generations differ as well: the Xeon lists PCIe Gen 2, while the i3’s PCIe information is not provided. The i3 includes integrated UHD 620 graphics, while the Xeon has no integrated graphics at all. These differences reflect their target markets: the i3 is a mobile part for consumer laptops, while the Xeon is a server/workstation chip requiring discrete graphics.

The production statuses further highlight their divergent lifecycles. The i3-8130U is listed as Active, released on 2018-02-12, while the Xeon W5590 is End-of-life, released on 2009-08-08. The Xeon launched with an MSRP of $1600, but the i3 has no listed launch MSRP. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not an option for either.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon W5590 has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core i3-8130U has only 2 cores and 4 threads. Despite this 2x core advantage, the Xeon loses every benchmark to the i3.

Q: Does the i3-8130U support ECC memory?

A: No. The i3-8130U does not support ECC memory and uses DDR4. The Xeon W5590 supports ECC memory and uses DDR3 with triple-channel configuration.

Q: What is the performance difference in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The i3-8130U scores 2995, which is 4.5% higher than the Xeon W5590’s 2867. This is the largest multi-core margin in the comparison.

Q: Are these CPUs in the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, both sit at the 27th percentile among all CPUs. The i3-8130U has an average benchmark score of 994, while the Xeon W5590 averages 986.

Q: Which CPU has integrated graphics?

A: Only the Intel Core i3-8130U has integrated graphics, specifically Intel UHD 620. The Xeon W5590 has no integrated graphics, requiring a discrete GPU.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the Xeon W5590?

A: The Intel Xeon W5590 had a launch MSRP of $1600. The i3-8130U has no launch MSRP listed in the data.

Specification Differences

The key specification differences between the two processors are stark. The i3-8130U has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the Xeon W5590 has 4 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks differ: the i3 runs at 2.40 GHz, the Xeon at 3.33 GHz. Boost clocks are closer, with the i3 at 3.40 GHz and the Xeon at 3.60 GHz. Thermal design power is a major split: the i3 draws 15 W, while the Xeon draws 130 W — an 8.7x difference.

Sockets are incompatible: the i3 uses Intel BGA 1356, the Xeon uses Intel Socket 1366. The i3 is built on a 14 nm process with a 123 mm² die, while the Xeon uses 45 nm with a 263 mm² die and 731 million transistors. L3 cache differs: the i3 has 4 MB shared, the Xeon has 8 MB shared. Memory support diverges: the i3 uses DDR4 without ECC, the Xeon uses DDR3 with triple-channel, 32.0 GB/s bandwidth, and ECC support. The Xeon lists PCIe Gen 2, while the i3 has no PCIe data. Integrated graphics are present only on the i3 (UHD 620). The i3 is an Active mobile part from 2018, while the Xeon is an End-of-life server/workstation part from 2009.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i3-8130U wins every single benchmark in this comparison, so its strengths are clear. It dominates in single-core performance, as shown by the 4.7% lead in Cinebench R20 single-core and the 4.5% lead in R23 single-core. This makes it the better choice for lightly-threaded applications, older software, and tasks that rely on per-core speed. Its dramatically lower 15 W TDP also makes it suitable for thin-and-light laptops, where the Xeon’s 130 W TDP would be impossible to cool. The i3’s integrated UHD 620 graphics provide a complete package for basic display output without a discrete GPU.

The Intel Xeon W5590, despite losing every benchmark, has theoretical advantages. Its 4 cores and 8 threads mean it processes more threads simultaneously, which could benefit workloads that scale well beyond the benchmark suite. The 8 MB of L3 cache is double the i3’s 4 MB, potentially helping in cache-sensitive server workloads. ECC memory support is a critical feature for data integrity in server environments. The triple-channel DDR3 memory with 32.0 GB/s bandwidth provides high memory throughput. However, the benchmark data does not show any scenario where the Xeon wins — in all five tested workloads, the i3 comes out ahead.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the Intel Core i3-8130U is the better performing processor. It wins all five head-to-head tests, with margins ranging from 4.4% to 4.7%. The i3 achieves this with half the cores, half the L3 cache, and a dramatically lower TDP. Its modern 14 nm Kaby Lake architecture delivers superior instructions-per-clock, making it the faster chip for Cinebench workloads across the board. The Xeon W5590’s higher core count and larger cache do not translate into a single benchmark win.

However, the choice is not purely about raw speed. The Xeon W5590 offers ECC memory support, triple-channel DDR3, and a server/workstation platform with PCIe Gen 2 — features the i3 lacks. For a legacy workstation requiring ECC and high memory bandwidth, the Xeon may still be relevant. But for general-purpose computing, the i3-8130U is clearly superior: it is faster in every tested metric, uses far less power, includes integrated graphics, and is still an active product. The data suggests that the i3-8130U is the pragmatic pick for anyone choosing between these two, unless the Xeon’s server-specific features are an absolute requirement. Given that the i3 wins every benchmark and matches the Xeon’s 27th percentile standing, the verdict is straightforward: the modern mobile chip outclasses the old server part in every measured dimension.