Intel Core i3-9100F vs Intel Xeon E3-1575M v5 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E3-1575M v5 and Intel Core i3-9100F are both 14 nm quad-core Intel parts, but they occupy different worlds: one is a mobile/embedded workstation Xeon with a 45 W TDP, the other a desktop Core i3 with a 65 W TDP. The benchmark data is unusually one-sided. Across all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, the Xeon E3-1575M v5 wins every single matchup, with no test going to the Core i3-9100F. The margins are consistent, ranging from 15.9% to 16.3% in the Xeon’s favor. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Xeon scores 6607 versus 5697 for the Core i3, a 16% advantage. Single-core R23 shows 932 versus 804, a 15.9% lead. The pattern repeats in R20 (2774 vs 2392, 16% multi; 391 vs 337, 16% single) and R15 (665 vs 574, 15.9% multi; 93 vs 80, 16.3% single). The Xeon’s largest win is in R15 single-core at 16.3%, while its smallest is the 15.9% margin in R23 multi-core and R15 multi-core. The Core i3-9100F has no competitive bright spot; its highest single-core score, 804 in R23, is still 15.9% behind the Xeon’s 932.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data shows a systematic, not incidental, performance gap. The Xeon E3-1575M v5 leads in every measured workload, and the deltas are tight, suggesting the advantage comes from architectural throughput rather than a single favorable test. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 665 against 574, a 15.9% lead. The same test’s single-core run gives the Xeon 93 versus 80, a 16.3% edge — the largest delta in the entire comparison. Moving to Cinebench R20, the Xeon’s multi-core score is 2774, which is 16% higher than the Core i3’s 2392. Single-core R20 follows with 391 versus 337, again 16%. The most demanding test, Cinebench R23, shows the Xeon at 6607 multi-core and 932 single-core, while the Core i3 manages 5697 and 804, respectively. Both R23 deltas land at 16% and 15.9%. Across all six benchmarks, the Xeon’s win margin never falls below 15.9%, which indicates a consistent performance ceiling for the Core i3 that the Xeon simply clears in every scenario. The Core i3’s higher boost clock of 4.20 GHz versus the Xeon’s 3.90 GHz does not translate into a single-core win; the Xeon’s 16.3% R15 single-core lead proves that clock speed alone does not dictate benchmark outcomes. In aggregate, the Xeon’s average benchmark score is 1910, while the Core i3 sits at 1903. Both parts land in the 43rd percentile of all CPUs, meaning they are statistically equivalent in overall standing, yet the head-to-head scores tell a different story: the Xeon wins 6-0.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split explains the benchmark results. The Xeon E3-1575M v5 is built on Skylake-H, a 14 nm process with 2,300 million transistors on a 171 mm² die. It has 4 cores and 8 threads, with Hyper-Threading enabled. The Core i3-9100F is Coffee Lake, also 14 nm, but its die is smaller at 126 mm² and its transistor count is not listed in the data. Critically, the Core i3 has 4 cores and only 4 threads — no Hyper-Threading. That alone accounts for much of the multi-core deficit: the Xeon can process two threads per core, effectively doubling its logical core count in threaded workloads. The Xeon’s L3 cache is 8 MB shared, versus 6 MB shared on the Core i3. Both have 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core. The Xeon supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory, while the Core i3 is DDR4-only. Memory bandwidth favors the Core i3 at 38.4 GB/s versus the Xeon’s 34.1 GB/s, but this does not translate into a performance win in the tested workloads. The Xeon includes integrated graphics (Iris Pro Graphics P580), whereas the Core i3-9100F has none — the "F" suffix indicates a disabled iGPU. Both parts support ECC memory, which is unusual for a desktop Core i3 but present here. The Xeon uses Intel BGA 1440, a soldered mobile socket, while the Core i3 uses Intel Socket 1151, a desktop LGA socket. The Xeon’s base clock is 3.00 GHz with a 3.90 GHz boost, and its TDP is 45 W. The Core i3 runs at 3.60 GHz base and 4.20 GHz boost, with a 65 W TDP. The Xeon’s lower thermal envelope and higher thread count suggest it is designed for sustained, multi-threaded workstation loads, while the Core i3 targets desktop use with higher raw clocks but fewer threads. The Xeon is a Server/Workstation part released in January 2016; the Core i3 is a Desktop part released in April 2019. Both are end-of-life. The Xeon’s launch MSRP is $1207; the Core i3’s launch MSRP is $122.

The Verdict

From the data alone, the Intel Xeon E3-1575M v5 is the superior processor in every benchmarked workload. It wins all six Cinebench tests, with margins between 15.9% and 16.3%. The Xeon’s 8 threads versus the Core i3’s 4 threads provide a clear multi-core advantage, but the single-core wins are more telling. The Core i3 has a higher boost clock (4.20 GHz vs 3.90 GHz), yet it still loses single-core by 15.9-16.3%. This indicates the Xeon’s Skylake architecture delivers more instructions per clock in these tests, despite the Core i3’s newer Coffee Lake design. The Xeon also carries 8 MB of L3 cache versus 6 MB, and its lower 45 W TDP suggests better power efficiency for the performance delivered. The Core i3’s only advantages are a higher memory bandwidth (38.4 GB/s vs 34.1 GB/s) and a dramatically lower launch MSRP — $122 versus $1207. But on pure benchmark performance, the Xeon is the clear winner. For users who prioritize single-threaded and multi-threaded Cinebench scores, the Xeon E3-1575M v5 is the choice. The Core i3-9100F would only be preferable if the use case is constrained by the socket (Socket 1151 desktop boards) or if the price difference is the deciding factor — though the data shows a 43rd percentile ranking for both parts, meaning they are not far apart in the grand scheme of all CPUs. The Xeon’s 6-0 win record is unambiguous.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1575M v5 wins with a score of 6607 versus the Intel Core i3-9100F’s 5697, a 16% advantage.

Q: Does the Core i3-9100F have any single-core win?

A: No. The Xeon leads in every single-core test: R15 (93 vs 80, 16.3%), R20 (391 vs 337, 16%), and R23 (932 vs 804, 15.9%).

Q: What is the thread count difference?

A: The Xeon E3-1575M v5 has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Core i3-9100F has 4 cores and 4 threads.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The Xeon E3-1575M v5 has 8 MB shared L3 cache; the Core i3-9100F has 6 MB shared L3 cache.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Xeon E3-1575M v5 and the Core i3-9100F support ECC memory, per the data.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each?

A: The Xeon E3-1575M v5 has an average benchmark score of 1910, and the Core i3-9100F has 1903. Both rank in the 43rd percentile of all CPUs.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon E3-1575M v5 wins in every benchmark category where data exists: all six Cinebench tests (R15, R20, R23, both single and multi-core). Its wins are purely performance-based. The Core i3-9100F wins in no benchmark test. However, the Core i3 has structural advantages outside of Cinebench scores. It has a higher base clock (3.60 GHz vs 3.00 GHz) and higher boost clock (4.20 GHz vs 3.90 GHz), which could matter in workloads not represented in the Cinebench suite, though the data does not show any such test. The Core i3 also has higher memory bandwidth (38.4 GB/s vs 34.1 GB/s) and uses a desktop Socket 1151, which is more common in consumer motherboards than the Xeon’s BGA 1440 soldered socket. The Core i3’s 65 W TDP is higher than the Xeon’s 45 W, but for desktop builds, that is less of a constraint. The Xeon’s integrated graphics (Iris Pro Graphics P580) give it a functional edge for systems without a discrete GPU; the Core i3 has no integrated graphics at all. For use cases strictly defined by Cinebench-style rendering and multi-threaded throughput, the Xeon is the only choice. For desktop users with a discrete GPU who need a Socket 1151 part and can tolerate lower multi-threaded scores, the Core i3-9100F’s higher clock speeds may be preferable in single-threaded legacy apps, but the data cannot confirm this — it only shows the Xeon winning all tested single-core benchmarks. The Xeon’s 6 wins versus 0 wins is the final tally.