Intel Core i3-8300 vs Intel Xeon E3-1268L v5 Comparison

The Intel Core i3-8300 and Intel Xeon E3-1268L v5 are both 14 nm, quad-core Socket 1151 parts, but they target different corners of the Intel lineup. The i3-8300 is a desktop Coffee Lake chip with a 62 W TDP, while the Xeon E3-1268L v5 is a Skylake-DT server/workstation part with a 35 W TDP. Benchmark data shows the i3-8300 wins every single head-to-head test, but the margins are remarkably thin, making the choice between them a matter of workload priorities rather than raw speed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data is unambiguous: the Core i3-8300 wins all six head-to-head Cinebench comparisons, though the largest margin is just 0.6 percent. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the i3-8300 scores 545 against the Xeon’s 542, a 0.6 percent lead—the biggest gap in the entire set. The pattern holds in Cinebench R20 multicore, where the i3-8300 posts 2271 versus 2260 for the Xeon, a 0.5 percent difference. Cinebench R23 multicore shows the same story: 5408 for the i3-8300 and 5383 for the Xeon, again a 0.5 percent edge.

Single-threaded results are even closer. In Cinebench R15 single-core, both chips tie at 76, with the i3-8300 listed as the winner by a 0 percent delta—effectively a dead heat. Cinebench R20 single-core gives the i3-8300 a 320 score against 319 for the Xeon, a 0.3 percent margin. Cinebench R23 single-core rounds out the sweep: 763 versus 760, a 0.4 percent advantage for the i3-8300.

What these numbers suggest is that the Xeon’s extra threads—it has 8 threads versus the i3-8300’s 4—do not translate into a multicore win. The Xeon’s lower 2.40 GHz base clock (with a 3.40 GHz boost) is consistently outpaced by the i3-8300’s 3.70 GHz fixed clock. Yet the fact that the Xeon stays within 0.6 percent across all multicore tests, despite a 1.3 GHz base-clock disadvantage, highlights the efficiency of its Skylake architecture and hyper-threading. The i3-8300 wins, but it is a pyrrhic victory in terms of margin.

The average benchmark score reinforces the near-equality. The i3-8300 has an average of 1564, while the Xeon E3-1268L v5 sits at 1557. Both chips occupy the 39th percentile among all CPUs, placing them in the same performance tier. The nearest rivals for the i3-8300 include the Core i5-6600T at 1563 (0 percent delta) and the Ryzen 3 1300X at 1562 (0.1 percent), while the Xeon’s nearest rival is the AMD FX-8350 at 1557 (0 percent delta) and the Core i3-9300 at 1554 (0.2 percent). These rivalries confirm that both chips are clustered in a tight band of mid-range performance.

The Verdict

From the benchmark data alone, the Core i3-8300 is the faster processor in every measured test. Users seeking maximum Cinebench scores should pick the i3-8300, as it leads the Xeon E3-1268L v5 in all six head-to-head comparisons, even if the largest advantage is only 0.6 percent. The i3-8300 also has a higher base clock (3.70 GHz versus 2.40 GHz) and a higher TDP (62 W versus 35 W), which correlates with its slight performance edge.

However, the Xeon E3-1268L v5 is not without merit. Its 8 threads provide a structural advantage for heavily threaded workloads, even if Cinebench does not show it. The Xeon also matches the i3-8300 on single-core performance at 76 in R15, and trails by less than 1 percent in all other tests. For a server or workstation environment where power draw is critical, the Xeon’s 35 W TDP is a decisive feature—it delivers nearly identical performance at nearly half the thermal envelope.

The choice depends on context. For a desktop user who wants the fastest possible scores in these benchmarks, the i3-8300 is the pick. For a system builder prioritizing energy efficiency or requiring server-grade features, the Xeon E3-1268L v5 offers the same performance class with a much lower power budget. Both are end-of-life parts, but the data does not favor one universally—it depends on whether the 0.6 percent speed advantage or the 27 W power advantage matters more.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different Intel microarchitectures. The Core i3-8300 is built on Coffee Lake, Intel’s 14 nm refinement of Skylake, while the Xeon E3-1268L v5 uses Skylake-DT, the original Skylake design. Both use a 14 nm process node and are fabricated by Intel, but the die sizes differ slightly: the i3-8300 measures 126 mm², while the Xeon is 122 mm². The Xeon’s transistor count is listed at 1,750 million, whereas the i3-8300’s transistor count is not provided in the data.

Cache configurations are identical on paper: both have 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The core counts match at 4, but the Xeon doubles the thread count to 8 via hyper-threading, which the i3-8300 lacks. This is the most significant architectural divergence—the i3-8300 is a pure quad-core, while the Xeon is a quad-core with simultaneous multithreading.

Integrated graphics also differ. The i3-8300 pairs with UHD Graphics 630, while the Xeon E3-1268L v5 uses HD Graphics P530. Both are Intel integrated solutions, but the UHD 630 is the newer generation. The Xeon’s market segment is listed as Server/Workstation, reflecting its ECC memory support and lower TDP, while the i3-8300 is a Desktop part. Both support ECC memory, but the Xeon supports both DDR3 and DDR4, whereas the i3-8300 is limited to DDR4.

Specification Differences

The core specification table shows several divergences. The base clock differs dramatically: the i3-8300 runs at 3.70 GHz with no boost clock listed, while the Xeon E3-1268L v5 has a 2.40 GHz base and a 3.40 GHz boost. The TDP gap is even larger—62 W for the i3-8300 versus 35 W for the Xeon—making the Xeon a low-power part. The i3-8300 was released on 2018-02-13, while the Xeon predates it by more than two years, launching on 2015-10-18.

Memory bandwidth favors the i3-8300 at 38.4 GB/s, against 34.1 GB/s for the Xeon. The integrated graphics differ as noted: UHD Graphics 630 versus HD Graphics P530. The launch MSRP is vastly different—the i3-8300 had a launch MSRP of $138, while the Xeon E3-1268L v5 had a launch MSRP of $377. Both use the same socket (Intel Socket 1151) and PCIe configuration (Gen 3, 16 lanes CPU-only). The part numbers are SR3XY for the i3-8300 and SR2LQ for the Xeon.

Other fields are identical: both are dual-channel, both support ECC, both have 4 cores, and both are locked (multiplier unlocked is false). The Xeon’s memory support for DDR3 is a unique differentiator, as is its transistor count of 1,750 million, which the i3-8300 does not list. The die size difference is minor (126 mm² versus 122 mm²), but the architecture generation—Coffee Lake versus Skylake—is a clear generational split.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in single-core performance?

A: The Core i3-8300 wins in single-core tests, but by negligible margins. In Cinebench R15, both score 76, a 0 percent delta. In R20, the i3-8300 scores 320 versus 319 for the Xeon (0.3 percent), and in R23 it scores 763 versus 760 (0.4 percent).

Q: Does the Xeon E3-1268L v5 have more threads?

A: Yes. The Xeon has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Core i3-8300 has 4 cores and 4 threads. Despite this, the Xeon does not win any multicore benchmark, losing by 0.5-0.6 percent across R15, R20, and R23.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Core i3-8300 has a TDP of 62 W, while the Xeon E3-1268L v5 has a TDP of 35 W. This makes the Xeon significantly more power-efficient, with a 27 W lower thermal envelope.

Q: Do both CPUs support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Core i3-8300 and the Xeon E3-1268L v5 have ECC memory support. However, the Xeon supports both DDR3 and DDR4, while the i3-8300 only supports DDR4.

Q: Which chip has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Core i3-8300 has an average benchmark score of 1564, while the Xeon E3-1268L v5 has an average of 1557. Both sit at the 39th percentile among all CPUs.

Q: How does the launch MSRP compare?

A: The Core i3-8300 had a launch MSRP of $138, while the Xeon E3-1268L v5 had a launch MSRP of $377. The Xeon was more than twice the price at launch, despite delivering nearly identical benchmark results.