Intel Core i3-9100 vs Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 and the Intel Core i3-9100 are both 14nm quad-core processors, but the benchmark data reveals a clear and consistent winner: the Xeon E3-1505M v5 wins every single head-to-head test, despite being a mobile/server part from an older generation. The Xeon's advantage is not marginal; it leads by roughly 12% across the board in all six Cinebench workloads, both single-core and multi-core. The Core i3-9100, despite its higher clock speeds and newer Coffee Lake architecture, cannot overcome the Xeon's thread advantage and superior memory setup, resulting in a decisive victory for the older, workstation-oriented chip.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data is unambiguous. Across all six Cinebench benchmarks, the Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 emerges victorious with a consistent performance lead of approximately 11.7% to 12.7% over the Intel Core i3-9100. This is not a case of one chip winning synthetic tests while losing in others; the Xeon dominates both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads.

In multi-core tests, the Xeon's 8 threads provide a substantial advantage over the i3-9100's 4 threads. The Xeon scores 633 in Cinebench R15 multicore, which is 11.8% higher than the i3-9100's 566. This pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multicore, where the Xeon's 2639 points beat the i3's 2361 by the same 11.8% margin. The gap persists in the newer Cinebench R23 multicore test, with the Xeon posting 6284 against the i3-9100's 5622, again an 11.8% advantage.

What is more surprising is the Xeon's lead in single-core performance. Despite having a lower base clock (2.80 GHz vs 3.60 GHz) and lower boost clock (3.70 GHz vs 4.20 GHz) than the i3-9100, the Xeon scores higher in every single-core test. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Xeon achieves 89 points versus the i3's 79, a 12.7% lead. Cinebench R20 single-core shows the Xeon at 372 versus 333 for the i3, an 11.7% difference. The trend continues in Cinebench R23 single-core, with the Xeon scoring 887 and the i3-9100 scoring 793, a lead of 11.9%.

The i3-9100 has additional Geekbench scores in its data, but the Xeon does not, so no direct comparison is possible there. However, the six Cinebench tests provide a complete picture: the Xeon E3-1505M v5 is faster in every measurable workload. The wins tally stands at 6 for the Xeon and 0 for the i3-9100. The average benchmark score for the Xeon is 1817, while the i3-9100 sits at 1806, a difference of only 0.6% in average, but the Cinebench head-to-head shows the true nature of the performance gap. The Xeon's nearest rival is the Intel Core i5-6600K with an average score of 1816, a negligible 0.1% difference, while the i3-9100's closest competitor is the Intel Core i3-9320 at 1808, just 0.1% ahead.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages and target different market segments, which explains the performance disparity. The Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 is based on the Skylake-H architecture, built on Intel's 14nm process node with 2,300 million transistors on a 122 mm² die. It is a server/workstation part, designed for mobile workstations, and its production status is end-of-life, with a release date of October 2015.

In contrast, the Intel Core i3-9100 uses the Coffee Lake architecture, also on a 14nm process node, but with a slightly larger die size of 126 mm². It is a desktop part, released in August 2018, and is also end-of-life. The foundry for both is Intel, but their design philosophies differ. The Xeon's transistor count is listed at 2,300 million, while the i3-9100's is not specified in the data.

The most critical architectural difference is the thread count. The Xeon E3-1505M v5 supports 8 threads across its 4 cores, thanks to Hyper-Threading technology. The Core i3-9100 has only 4 threads for its 4 cores, lacking this feature. This is the primary reason for the Xeon's multi-core dominance. Additionally, cache configurations differ: the Xeon has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i3-9100 has only 6 MB. Both have the same per-core L1 (64 KB) and L2 (256 KB) cache sizes.

The Xeon also supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory, whereas the i3-9100 supports only DDR4. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the i3-9100 has a higher memory bandwidth at 38.4 GB/s compared to the Xeon's 34.1 GB/s. Both support ECC memory, a feature typically associated with server and workstation platforms. The integrated graphics differ as well: the Xeon has HD Graphics P530, while the i3-9100 has UHD Graphics 630. The Xeon uses the Intel BGA 1440 socket, while the i3-9100 uses the Intel Socket 1151. The Xeon's market segment is server/workstation, while the i3-9100 is a desktop processor.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core benchmarks?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 is faster in all multi-core Cinebench tests. It scores 633 in R15, 2639 in R20, and 6284 in R23, compared to the Core i3-9100's 566, 2361, and 5622 respectively, representing an 11.8% lead in each case.

Q: Does the Core i3-9100 have an advantage in single-core performance due to higher clocks?

A: No. The Core i3-9100 has higher base (3.60 GHz) and boost (4.20 GHz) clocks than the Xeon (2.80 GHz and 3.70 GHz), but the Xeon still wins every single-core test. The Xeon scores 89, 372, and 887 in R15, R20, and R23 single-core, versus the i3's 79, 333, and 793, a lead of 11.7% to 12.7%.

Q: How many threads does each processor have?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 has 8 threads, while the Intel Core i3-9100 has 4 threads. Both have 4 physical cores.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 and the Intel Core i3-9100 support ECC memory, according to the data.

Q: What are the cache sizes for these CPUs?

A: Both have 64 KB of L1 cache and 256 KB of L2 cache per core. The Xeon E3-1505M v5 has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core i3-9100 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Xeon E3-1505M v5 has an average benchmark score of 1817, while the Core i3-9100 has an average score of 1806. The Xeon's score is 0.6% higher.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two processors:

• Threads: The Xeon E3-1505M v5 has 8 threads; the Core i3-9100 has 4 threads.
• Base Clock: The Xeon runs at 2.80 GHz; the i3-9100 runs at 3.60 GHz.
• Boost Clock: The Xeon boosts to 3.70 GHz; the i3-9100 boosts to 4.20 GHz.
• TDP: The Xeon has a TDP of 45W; the i3-9100 has a TDP of 65W.
• Socket: The Xeon uses Intel BGA 1440; the i3-9100 uses Intel Socket 1151.
• Architecture: The Xeon is based on Skylake-H; the i3-9100 is based on Coffee Lake.
• L3 Cache: The Xeon has 8 MB shared; the i3-9100 has 6 MB shared.
• Memory Support: The Xeon supports DDR3 and DDR4; the i3-9100 supports only DDR4.
• Memory Bandwidth: The Xeon has 34.1 GB/s; the i3-9100 has 38.4 GB/s.
• Integrated Graphics: The Xeon has HD Graphics P530; the i3-9100 has UHD Graphics 630.
• Market Segment: The Xeon is server/workstation; the i3-9100 is desktop.
• Release Date: The Xeon was released in 2015; the i3-9100 in 2018.
• Launch MSRP: The Xeon had a launch MSRP of $434; the i3-9100 had a launch MSRP of $122.
• Part Number: The Xeon is SR2FM; the i3-9100 is SRCZV.
• Die Size: The Xeon's die is 122 mm²; the i3-9100's die is 126 mm².
• Transistors: The Xeon has 2,300 million transistors; the i3-9100's count is not listed.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 wins in all six head-to-head Cinebench benchmarks, which means it is the superior choice for both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads. Its 8 threads make it particularly strong for multi-threaded applications like video rendering, 3D modeling, and scientific computing, where the 11.8% lead over the i3-9100 in R15, R20, and R23 multicore tests translates to tangible performance gains. The Xeon's lower TDP of 45W also suggests it is more power-efficient, making it suitable for compact or thermally constrained systems, despite being a mobile socket part (BGA 1440).

The Intel Core i3-9100, while losing all benchmarks, still has some distinct advantages based on its specifications. It has a higher memory bandwidth (38.4 GB/s vs 34.1 GB/s), which could benefit memory-intensive tasks. Its higher base and boost clocks (3.60 GHz and 4.20 GHz) did not translate into benchmark wins, but they indicate a different design point. The i3-9100 also has a newer integrated GPU (UHD Graphics 630) compared to the Xeon's HD Graphics P530, which may be relevant for systems relying on integrated graphics. The i3-9100's desktop socket (Socket 1151) offers more platform flexibility and upgrade options than the Xeon's soldered BGA 1440 package.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 is the clear winner. It outperforms the Intel Core i3-9100 in every single test, with a consistent 11.8% to 12.7% advantage across all Cinebench workloads. The Xeon's 8 threads versus the i3-9100's 4 threads provide a decisive advantage in multi-core tasks, and its superior single-core performance, despite lower clock speeds, indicates a more efficient architecture. The Xeon also offers more L3 cache (8 MB vs 6 MB) and a lower TDP (45W vs 65W), making it a more power-efficient choice.

For users who prioritize raw compute performance in both single-threaded and multi-threaded applications, the Xeon E3-1505M v5 is the superior processor. The Core i3-9100, while having a higher memory bandwidth and newer integrated graphics, cannot match the Xeon's processing power. The i3-9100's only advantages are its higher clock speeds and lower launch MSRP ($122 vs $434), but these did not result in any benchmark wins. Therefore, from a pure performance perspective, the Xeon E3-1505M v5 is the recommended choice for workloads where CPU throughput is the primary concern. The i3-9100 would only be preferable in scenarios where the specific platform features, such as the desktop socket or newer iGPU, are more important than raw compute scores.