Intel Core i3-8300T vs Intel Xeon E3-1240L v5 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E3-1240L v5 and Intel Core i3-8300T are both low-power, four-core processors for the Intel Socket 1151 platform, but they target different market segments and deliver distinct performance profiles. The Xeon is a server/workstation part from the Skylake generation, while the i3 is a desktop Coffee Lake chip. In every benchmark recorded, the Xeon E3-1240L v5 holds a commanding lead, but the i3-8300T brings a much higher base clock and a newer architecture to the table. The data shows a clear winner in raw compute, but the choice depends heavily on whether you need the Xeon’s extra threads and ECC support or the i3’s integrated graphics and higher frequency.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are one-sided. The Intel Xeon E3-1240L v5 wins all six recorded head-to-head comparisons, with the Intel Core i3-8300T trailing by roughly 19% in every test. In Cinebench R15, the Xeon scores 560 in multi-core versus 469 for the i3, a 19.4% advantage. The single-core gap is nearly identical: 78 points for the Xeon versus 66 for the i3, a delta of 18.2%. This pattern holds across newer Cinebench versions. In R20, the Xeon posts 2336 multi-core and 329 single-core, while the i3 manages 1955 and 275, respectively — deltas of 19.5% and 19.6%. The R23 results reinforce the trend: the Xeon’s 5564 multi-core score beats the i3’s 4656 by 19.5%, and its 785 single-core score beats 657 by 19.5%.

These consistent margins suggest the Xeon’s advantage is structural rather than workload-specific. The Xeon’s 8 threads versus the i3’s 4 threads explain the multi-core gap, but the single-core wins are more surprising given the i3’s higher base clock of 3.20 GHz against the Xeon’s 2.10 GHz base. The Xeon’s boost clock reaches 3.20 GHz, matching the i3’s fixed frequency, which likely explains why it still wins single-core tests. The i3-8300T has no boost clock listed, so its 3.20 GHz is its ceiling, while the Xeon can ramp up to the same speed from a lower base. In practice, the Xeon’s 19.5% multi-core lead in R23 translates to a meaningful real-world difference in threaded workloads, and even its single-core lead of 19.5% in R23 is substantial enough to matter in everyday use.

When compared to its broader peer group, the Xeon E3-1240L v5 sits at the 39th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 1609. Its nearest rival is the Intel Core i7-10610U at 1611, a negligible -0.1% difference. The i3-8300T also sits at the 39th percentile, with an average score of 1586, and its closest competitor is the Intel Core i7-1060G7 at 1591, a -0.3% gap. Both chips are essentially average performers in the grand scheme, but the Xeon’s 1.5% higher average score (1609 vs 1586) reflects its consistent wins in the head-to-head tests.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel microarchitectures. The Xeon E3-1240L v5 is built on Skylake, specifically the Skylake-DT codename, while the i3-8300T uses Coffee Lake. Both are manufactured on Intel’s 14 nm process, but the Xeon uses a slightly smaller die at 122 mm² compared to the i3’s 126 mm². The Xeon’s transistor count is listed at 1,750 million, while the i3’s count is not provided. This die size difference is minor and unlikely to affect performance directly, but it reflects the different design priorities of each chip.

The most significant architectural split is in thread count. The Xeon E3-1240L v5 has 4 cores and 8 threads thanks to Hyper-Threading, while the i3-8300T has 4 cores and 4 threads with no simultaneous multithreading. This doubles the Xeon’s logical processing capacity, which is the primary driver of its multi-core benchmark wins. Both chips share the same cache hierarchy: 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The memory support differs, however. The Xeon supports both DDR3 and DDR4, while the i3 supports only DDR4. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the i3 has a higher memory bandwidth rating at 38.4 GB/s versus the Xeon’s 34.1 GB/s — a 12.6% advantage for the i3.

The integrated graphics situation is a major differentiator. The Xeon E3-1240L v5 has no integrated graphics listed, meaning it requires a discrete GPU for any display output. The i3-8300T, by contrast, includes Intel UHD Graphics 630, making it a self-contained desktop solution. Both chips support ECC memory, which is unusual for the i3’s desktop segment and aligns with the Xeon’s server/workstation heritage. The PCIe configuration is identical: Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Xeon’s TDP is 25 watts, while the i3’s is 35 watts — a 10-watt difference that makes the Xeon the more power-efficient choice on paper, despite its higher benchmark scores.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon E3-1240L v5 wins every benchmark in the head-to-head data, so its strengths are clear. In multi-threaded applications like video rendering, 3D modeling, or any workload that can use more than four threads, the Xeon’s 8 threads deliver a 19.4% to 19.5% advantage over the i3 in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests. This makes it the better choice for a compact server, a workstation, or a build where ECC memory is a requirement. The Xeon’s lower 25-watt TDP also makes it attractive for always-on systems or passive-cooled builds, as it draws less power while producing higher scores.

The i3-8300T’s wins are not in the benchmark suite but in its feature set. Its integrated UHD Graphics 630 means it can run a full desktop without a discrete GPU, which is a significant practical advantage for a basic office PC, a home theater setup, or a budget build where adding a graphics card is undesirable. The i3 also supports only DDR4, which simplifies memory compatibility in modern systems, and its 38.4 GB/s memory bandwidth is higher than the Xeon’s 34.1 GB/s, potentially benefiting memory-sensitive tasks. The i3’s 3.20 GHz base clock is also higher than the Xeon’s, though the Xeon’s boost clock matches it, so this advantage is largely neutralized in practice.

For workloads that are single-threaded and cannot use the Xeon’s extra threads, the Xeon still wins by 18.2% to 19.6% in Cinebench single-core tests. This is a counterintuitive result given the i3’s higher base frequency, but the data is unambiguous. The i3-8300T’s best case is a system where integrated graphics are mandatory and the performance deficit is acceptable, or where the newer Coffee Lake architecture is preferred for platform reasons. It also holds a slight edge in memory bandwidth, which could show up in certain real-world scenarios, though no benchmark in the pack captures this directly.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1240L v5 wins all multi-core Cinebench tests. It scores 560 in R15, 2336 in R20, and 5564 in R23, while the i3-8300T scores 469, 1955, and 4656, respectively. The Xeon’s advantage is a consistent 19.4% to 19.5% across all versions.

Q: Is the i3-8300T better for single-core tasks?

A: No. Despite its higher base clock of 3.20 GHz, the i3 loses every single-core test. The Xeon scores 78 in R15, 329 in R20, and 785 in R23, versus the i3’s 66, 275, and 657. The Xeon’s single-core lead ranges from 18.2% to 19.6%.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes. Both the Xeon E3-1240L v5 and the i3-8300T list ECC memory support as a feature. This is expected for the Xeon’s server segment but is a notable inclusion for the desktop-oriented i3.

Q: Which chip has integrated graphics?

A: Only the i3-8300T has integrated graphics, specifically Intel UHD Graphics 630. The Xeon E3-1240L v5 has no integrated graphics listed, so it requires a discrete GPU for display output.

Q: What are the power consumption figures?

A: The Xeon E3-1240L v5 has a TDP of 25 watts, while the i3-8300T has a TDP of 35 watts. The Xeon is the lower-power part, which aligns with its server/workstation positioning.

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

A: The Xeon’s average benchmark score is 1609, with its closest rival being the Intel Core i7-10610U at 1611 (-0.1%). The i3’s average is 1586, with the Intel Core i7-1060G7 at 1591 (-0.3%) as its nearest competitor. Both sit at the 39th percentile of all CPUs.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the data, the Intel Xeon E3-1240L v5 is the superior processor for compute performance. It wins all six head-to-head benchmarks with margins between 18.2% and 19.6%, offers double the thread count, and does so at a lower 25-watt TDP. Anyone building a system where CPU performance is the priority — whether for rendering, encoding, or multi-tasking — should pick the Xeon. Its lack of integrated graphics is a non-issue if a discrete GPU is already planned, and its ECC support makes it suitable for reliability-focused builds. The 39th percentile ranking for both chips indicates they are mid-pack performers, but the Xeon is clearly the stronger of the two.

The Intel Core i3-8300T is the right choice only if its integrated UHD Graphics 630 is essential. For a compact desktop that must run without a separate graphics card, the i3 is the only option here. It also offers higher memory bandwidth at 38.4 GB/s and a newer Coffee Lake architecture, but neither advantage translates into a benchmark win. The i3’s 35-watt TDP is higher than the Xeon’s, and its 4-thread limit holds it back in every multi-core test. Its launch MSRP is $138, compared to the Xeon’s $278, but pricing is not a factor in performance decisions. If you need a low-power CPU with integrated graphics and can accept a 19% performance deficit, the i3-8300T works. Otherwise, the Xeon E3-1240L v5 is the clear winner in every measured metric.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon E3-1240L v5 | Intel Core i3-8300T |

|----------------|------------------------|---------------------|

| Cores | 4 | 4 |

| Threads | 8 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 2.10 GHz | 3.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.20 GHz | None listed |

| TDP | 25 W | 35 W |

| Architecture | Skylake (Skylake-DT) | Coffee Lake |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 14 nm |

| Die Size | 122 mm² | 126 mm² |

| Transistors | 1,750 million | Not listed |

| Memory Support | DDR3, DDR4 | DDR4 only |

| Memory Bandwidth | 34.1 GB/s | 38.4 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | Yes |

| Integrated Graphics | None | UHD Graphics 630 |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2015-10-18 | 2018-04-01 |

| Launch MSRP | $278 | $138 |

| Part Number | SR2LN | SR3Y1 |