CPU Comparison

The Intel Xeon E-2104G and Intel Core i3-9100TE are both 4-core, 4-thread Coffee Lake processors on the Intel Socket 1151 platform, but the benchmark data shows a decisive performance gap. The Xeon E-2104G wins all six head-to-head Cinebench comparisons, with margins ranging from 23.6% to 24.4%. Both processors sit at the 37th percentile of all CPUs, yet their average benchmark scores, 1402 for the Xeon versus 1386 for the Core i3, reflect a consistent edge for the workstation part. This is not a close contest; the data indicates the Xeon E-2104G is the superior performer across every measured workload, despite the Core i3-9100TE’s lower power envelope.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Xeon E-2104G’s dominance is consistent across all six Cinebench tests. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 488 against the Core i3’s 393, a 24.2% advantage. The single-core R15 result follows the same pattern: 68 versus 55, a 23.6% lead. Moving to Cinebench R20, the Xeon posts 2035 multi-core and 287 single-core, while the Core i3 manages 1638 and 231 respectively, both representing a 24.2% delta. The margin grows slightly in Cinebench R23, where the Xeon’s 4847 multi-core and 684 single-core scores outpace the Core i3’s 3900 and 550 by 24.3% and 24.4% respectively.

The uniformity of these deltas is notable. Across every test, the Xeon’s advantage hovers near 24%, suggesting a fixed architectural or clock-related gap rather than workload-specific strengths. The Core i3-9100TE does have a boost clock of 3.20 GHz, but its base clock is 2.20 GHz, while the Xeon runs at a fixed 3.20 GHz with no boost. This likely explains the consistent margin: the Xeon maintains its maximum frequency across all cores, whereas the Core i3’s lower base clock under sustained load reduces its throughput.

In terms of broader context, the Xeon E-2104G’s average benchmark score of 1402 places it 0.1% ahead of the Intel Xeon E3-1220 v5 (1401) and 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core i5-6500TE (1399). The Core i3-9100TE’s 1386 average sits 0.1% behind the AMD Opteron 6274 (1387) and 0.3% behind the AMD Opteron 6238 (1383). These rival comparisons underscore that while both chips are mid-pack performers, the Xeon edges out its peers while the Core i3 slightly trails its closest competitors.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the same 14 nm process node, Coffee Lake architecture, and 126 mm² die size, but they diverge in several key specifications. The Xeon E-2104G belongs to the Coffee Lake-S WS workstation variant, while the Core i3-9100TE uses the Coffee Lake Refresh core. The Xeon has an 8 MB shared L3 cache, whereas the Core i3 has only 6 MB, a 33% difference that contributes to the performance gap. Both have identical L1 (64 KB per core) and L2 (256 KB per core) caches.

Memory bandwidth differs significantly: the Xeon supports 42.7 GB/s versus the Core i3’s 38.4 GB/s, a 11.2% advantage for the workstation part. Both support DDR4 memory in dual-channel mode and both support ECC memory, making them suitable for reliability-focused builds. The integrated graphics differ as well: the Xeon carries UHD Graphics P630, while the Core i3 has UHD Graphics 630, a distinction that may matter for display output but does not appear in the CPU benchmark data.

The TDP is a major differentiator. The Xeon E-2104G has a 65 W TDP, while the Core i3-9100TE is rated at just 35 W. This makes the Core i3 significantly more power-efficient on paper, though at the cost of sustained performance. The Xeon’s higher TDP allows it to maintain higher clocks under load, which is reflected in its benchmark dominance. Both processors use Intel Socket 1151, but the Xeon is part of the Xeon E-2100 series aimed at server/workstation segments, while the Core i3 targets desktop use.

The release dates also differ: the Xeon launched on 2018-07-11, while the Core i3 arrived on 2019-03-31. Both are end-of-life products, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The Xeon’s part number is SR3WV, while the Core i3 uses SRGE0SRGQY. The Xeon’s launch MSRP was $193, and the Core i3’s was $122.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon E-2104G wins every benchmark category measured. In multi-threaded workloads, it leads by 24.2% in Cinebench R15 (488 vs 393) and R20 (2035 vs 1638), and by 24.3% in R23 (4847 vs 3900). This makes it the clear choice for rendering, video encoding, or any workload that scales across all four cores. The single-core results are equally one-sided: the Xeon leads by 23.6% in R15 (68 vs 55), 24.2% in R20 (287 vs 231), and 24.4% in R23 (684 vs 550). This means even lightly-threaded tasks like web browsing or office applications favor the Xeon.

The Core i3-9100TE’s only advantages are qualitative. Its 35 W TDP versus the Xeon’s 65 W makes it a better fit for thermally constrained systems or silent builds where power draw is a priority. Its lower launch MSRP of $122 versus $193 may also appeal to cost-conscious builds, though the performance gap is substantial. The Core i3 also has a boost clock of 3.20 GHz, matching the Xeon’s fixed clock, but its lower base clock of 2.20 GHz means it cannot sustain that speed indefinitely. For workloads that are bursty and short, the Core i3 may approach Xeon-level performance, but sustained loads will see it fall behind.

In the nearestRivals data, the Xeon’s closest competitor is the Xeon E3-1220 v5 (0.1% ahead) and the Pentium Gold G7400TE (0.2% behind). The Core i3’s closest rival is the Opteron 6274 (0.1% behind) and the Opteron 6238 (0.3% ahead). This places the Xeon in slightly better company among workstation-class parts, while the Core i3 trades blows with older AMD server chips.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Xeon E-2104G. It wins Cinebench R15 multi-core by 24.2% (488 vs 393), R20 by 24.2% (2035 vs 1638), and R23 by 24.3% (4847 vs 3900).

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes. Both the Intel Xeon E-2104G and the Intel Core i3-9100TE list ECC memory support, making both viable for error-checking applications.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Xeon E-2104G has a 65 W TDP, while the Core i3-9100TE is rated at 35 W. The Core i3 draws significantly less power, but this comes with lower sustained performance.

Q: How does the cache size compare?

A: The Xeon E-2104G has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core i3-9100TE has 6 MB. Both have identical 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 caches per core.

Q: Which chip has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Xeon E-2104G has an average benchmark score of 1402, while the Core i3-9100TE scores 1386. Both sit at the 37th percentile of all CPUs.

Q: Are these processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No. Both the Xeon E-2104G and the Core i3-9100TE have a multiplierUnlocked value of false, so neither supports overclocking.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon E-2104G | Intel Core i3-9100TE |

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

| Base Clock | 3.20 GHz | 2.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | None | 3.20 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 35 W |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 42.7 GB/s | 38.4 GB/s |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics P630 | UHD Graphics 630 |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2018-07-11 | 2019-03-31 |

| Launch MSRP | $193 | $122 |

| Part Number | SR3WV | SRGE0SRGQY |

| Codename | Coffee Lake-S WS | Coffee Lake |

The two chips share identical cores (4), threads (4), socket (Intel Socket 1151), process node (14 nm), die size (126 mm²), L1 cache (64 KB per core), L2 cache (256 KB per core), memory type (DDR4), memory bus (dual-channel), PCIe configuration (Gen 3, 16 lanes), and ECC support (true). They differ only in the fields listed above.

The Verdict

The Intel Xeon E-2104G is the clear performance winner, taking all six head-to-head benchmarks with margins between 23.6% and 24.4%. Its higher base clock (3.20 GHz vs 2.20 GHz), larger L3 cache (8 MB vs 6 MB), and greater memory bandwidth (42.7 GB/s vs 38.4 GB/s) all contribute to its dominance. For any workload where CPU throughput matters, rendering, encoding, compilation, the Xeon is the better choice, and its workstation market segment (Server/Workstation) reflects that intent.

The Intel Core i3-9100TE does have one meaningful advantage: a 35 W TDP versus the Xeon’s 65 W. For systems where power consumption or heat dissipation is the primary constraint, the Core i3 is the more practical option. Its lower launch MSRP of $122 (versus $193) also makes it cheaper upfront, but the performance deficit of roughly 24% across the board is substantial. The Core i3 also has a boost clock of 3.20 GHz, which matches the Xeon’s fixed clock, but its 2.20 GHz base clock means it cannot sustain that speed under load.

The data is unambiguous: the Xeon E-2104G is the faster processor in every measured scenario. The Core i3-9100TE should only be chosen when its lower TDP is a hard requirement, for example, in fanless or passively cooled builds, or when the lower launch price outweighs the performance loss. For general-purpose computing, rendering, or workstation tasks, the Xeon E-2104G is the superior part, and its average benchmark score of 1402 versus 1386 confirms that it is the better performer overall. Both chips are end-of-life, so availability may vary, but the performance hierarchy is clear: the Xeon leads, and the Core i3 trails.