Intel Core i3-9100F vs Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 Comparison

The benchmark data presents a clear and consistent picture: the Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 outperforms the Intel Core i3-9100F across every single Cinebench test included in the analysis. Despite being an older, lower-clocked mobile/server part, the Xeon’s advantage in thread count and cache configuration proves decisive. The Core i3-9100F, while a newer desktop part with a higher boost clock, cannot overcome the Xeon’s architectural and feature advantages in these specific workloads. The data shows a uniform victory margin, but the underlying reasons for this sweep are worth investigating.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The results of the head-to-head comparison are remarkably one-sided. The Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 wins all six benchmark comparisons, with a consistent performance advantage over the Intel Core i3-9100F. In the Cinebench R15 multi-core test, the Xeon scores 655 against the i3’s 574, a delta of 14.1%. The single-core R15 test shows a similar trend, with the Xeon at 92 and the i3 at 80, representing a 15% lead for the Xeon.

This pattern persists in newer benchmark versions. In Cinebench R20, the Xeon’s multi-core score of 2733 is 14.3% higher than the i3’s 2392. The single-core R20 results follow suit, with the Xeon scoring 385 versus the i3’s 337, a 14.2% difference. The most recent test, Cinebench R23, shows the Xeon achieving 6508 in multi-core and 918 in single-core, while the i3 manages 5697 and 804 respectively. These scores translate to a 14.2% advantage for the Xeon in both R23 tests.

What is striking is the uniformity of the performance gap. The deltaPct hovers around 14-15% in every test, regardless of whether the workload is single-threaded or multi-threaded. This suggests the Xeon’s advantage is not tied to a specific workload characteristic but is instead a fundamental result of its overall design. The i3-9100F, despite its higher base and boost clocks, cannot close the gap in any scenario. The data indicates that the Xeon’s superior per-thread efficiency, likely stemming from its larger cache and support for simultaneous multithreading, provides a consistent edge that clock speed alone cannot overcome.

Architecture Differences

The architectural chasm between these two processors explains the benchmark results. The Xeon E3-1558L v5 is built on the Skylake-H architecture using a 14 nm process, while the Core i3-9100F uses the Coffee Lake architecture, also on a 14 nm node. Both are manufactured by Intel, but their design goals diverge significantly.

The most critical difference is in thread support. The Xeon features 4 cores and 8 threads, utilizing Hyper-Threading technology. The Core i3-9100F, by contrast, has 4 cores and only 4 threads, lacking this capability. This means the Xeon can process twice as many threads simultaneously, which is a significant advantage in multi-threaded Cinebench tests where the workload can scale with available threads. The Xeon also boasts a larger L3 cache of 8 MB shared, compared to the i3’s 6 MB shared, providing more on-die storage for frequently accessed data.

The physical and power characteristics differ as well. The Xeon has a TDP of 45 W and uses the Intel BGA 1440 socket, while the i3 has a TDP of 65 W and uses the Intel Socket 1151. The Xeon’s die size is larger at 171 mm², containing 2,300 million transistors, whereas the i3’s die is 126 mm². The Xeon also integrates Iris Pro Graphics P555, while the i3-9100F has no integrated graphics, as indicated by the "F" designation. Memory support also varies: the Xeon supports both DDR3 and DDR4, while the i3 supports only DDR4, though the i3’s memory bandwidth is higher at 38.4 GB/s compared to the Xeon’s 34.1 GB/s. Both support ECC memory and PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes.

Where Each One Wins

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 wins in every benchmark category measured. There are no Cinebench tests where the Intel Core i3-9100F achieves a higher score. The Xeon’s six wins out of six comparisons confirm its dominance in both single-core and multi-core rendering workloads.

This suggests the Xeon is the superior choice for CPU-bound tasks that rely on raw processing power, such as 3D rendering and video encoding, as simulated by Cinebench. Its 8-thread capability allows it to handle parallel workloads more effectively than the i3’s 4 threads. The Xeon’s larger L3 cache also likely contributes to better performance in tasks that require repeated access to the same data sets.

The Core i3-9100F, despite its higher clock speeds (3.60 GHz base, 4.20 GHz boost versus the Xeon’s 1.90 GHz base and 3.30 GHz boost), cannot translate that clock advantage into benchmark wins. In this dataset, the i3 has no wins. The only areas where the i3 shows a theoretical advantage are its lower launch MSRP of $122 versus the Xeon’s $396, and its higher memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. However, in the benchmark scores analyzed, these factors do not lead to any performance victories.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 has a higher single-core score of 918, compared to the Intel Core i3-9100F’s score of 804, a difference of 14.2%.

Q: How does the multi-threaded performance of the Xeon E3-1558L v5 compare to the Core i3-9100F in Cinebench R20?

A: The Xeon E3-1558L v5 scores 2733 in the R20 multi-core test, which is 14.3% higher than the Core i3-9100F’s score of 2392.

Q: Does the Core i3-9100F have any benchmark wins over the Xeon E3-1558L v5?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows the Xeon E3-1558L v5 wins all six benchmark comparisons, with the Core i3-9100F recording zero wins.

Q: What is the difference in thread count between the two CPUs?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 supports 8 threads, while the Intel Core i3-9100F supports 4 threads. Both have 4 physical cores.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, which is larger than the 6 MB shared L3 cache found on the Intel Core i3-9100F.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for these two processors?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 has a TDP of 45 W, while the Intel Core i3-9100F has a higher TDP of 65 W.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 is the clear winner. It outperforms the Intel Core i3-9100F in every Cinebench test, with consistent margins of over 14%. For users whose primary concern is processing power in rendering or similar multi-threaded applications, the Xeon is the obvious choice from a performance standpoint. Its 8 threads and larger 8 MB L3 cache provide a tangible advantage that the i3’s higher clock speeds cannot match.

The Core i3-9100F, on the other hand, offers no performance advantages in this dataset. Its strengths lie elsewhere, such as a lower launch MSRP of $122 and higher memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, but these do not translate into benchmark wins. The i3 also has the advantage of a newer release date and a different socket, which may be relevant for platform compatibility, but not for raw compute performance as measured here.

The data suggests that for anyone building a system where Cinebench-style performance is critical, the Xeon E3-1558L v5 is the superior processor. The i3-9100F is a viable option only if the lower cost or specific platform requirements are the primary deciding factors, as its performance is demonstrably lower in all tested scenarios. The uniform 14% performance gap indicates a fundamental capability difference that cannot be bridged by overclocking or other tweaks, as both processors have locked multipliers.

Specification Differences

The following table outlines the key specification differences between the two processors, highlighting where they diverge.

| Specification | Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 | Intel Core i3-9100F |

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

| Threads | 8 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 1900.00 MHz | 3600.00 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.30 GHz | 4.20 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 65 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1440 | Intel Socket 1151 |

| Architecture | Skylake | Coffee Lake |

| Transistors | 2,300 million | Not specified |

| Die Size | 171 mm² | 126 mm² |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR3, DDR4 | DDR4 |

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

| Integrated Graphics | Iris Pro Graphics P555 | None |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Desktop |

| Launch MSRP | $396 | $122 |

| Release Date | 2016-05-30 | 2019-04-22 |