Intel Core i3-9320 vs Intel Xeon E-2224 Comparison

The Intel Core i3-9320 and the Intel Xeon E-2224 are two quad-core processors aimed at different market segments, yet they share the same physical foundation. The i3-9320 is a desktop part, while the Xeon E-2224 targets server and workstation duties. Both are built on the Coffee Lake architecture, use the same 14 nm process, and fit into the Intel Socket 1151. The data recorded in the database shows a clear pattern: the Core i3-9320 wins every single benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, but the margins are narrow. This raises an interesting question: does the Xeon’s higher boost clock and additional memory bandwidth compensate for its lower measured scores, or does the desktop chip simply hold the edge in everyday workloads?

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are unambiguous. Across all six Cinebench tests, the Intel Core i3-9320 finishes ahead of the Intel Xeon E-2224. In the multi-core tests, the i3-9320 scores 630 in Cinebench R15, while the Xeon E-2224 manages 614, a difference of 2.6 percent. The same pattern repeats in Cinebench R20, where the i3-9320 posts 2626 against the Xeon’s 2559, again a 2.6 percent lead. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i3-9320 records 6254, and the Xeon E-2224 scores 6093, maintaining that identical 2.6 percent gap.

Single-core results follow the same trend, though with slightly smaller deltas. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the i3-9320 scores 88, and the Xeon E-2224 scores 86, a 2.3 percent advantage for the desktop chip. Cinebench R20 single-core shows the i3-9320 at 370 versus the Xeon’s 361, a 2.5 percent lead. Finally, Cinebench R23 single-core has the i3-9320 at 882 and the Xeon E-2224 at 860, once again a 2.6 percent difference. The data shows that the i3-9320 wins all six tests, with no single benchmark favoring the Xeon.

What makes this interesting is the underlying clock speeds. The Xeon E-2224 has a higher boost clock of 4.60 GHz compared to the i3-9320’s 4.40 GHz. Yet, the i3-9320 still outperforms it in every measured test. The i3-9320 also has a higher base clock of 3.70 GHz versus 3.40 GHz, which likely contributes to its consistent lead in both single-core and multi-core workloads. The higher base clock appears to matter more than the Xeon’s boost advantage, at least in these Cinebench scenarios.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this picture. The i3-9320 has an average benchmark score of 1808, while the Xeon E-2224 trails at 1762. That is a difference of roughly 2.6 percent, matching the head-to-head deltas. The i3-9320 sits at the 42nd percentile among all CPUs, while the Xeon E-2224 lands at the 41st percentile. These are nearly identical positions, suggesting that the two chips perform at a very similar level overall, with the i3-9320 holding a slight but consistent edge.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2224 has a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, which is higher than the Intel Core i3-9320’s 4.40 GHz. Despite this, the i3-9320 wins every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Core i3-9320 and the Intel Xeon E-2224 support ECC memory. This is unusual for a desktop Core i3 part, but the data confirms that both chips list ECC memory as supported.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth between the two?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2224 has a memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s, while the Intel Core i3-9320 has 38.4 GB/s. The Xeon offers a higher theoretical bandwidth, yet it still scores lower in all recorded benchmarks.

Q: How do the two compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i3-9320 scores 6254 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the Intel Xeon E-2224 scores 6093. The i3-9320 leads by 2.6 percent in this test.

Q: Are the two processors built on the same manufacturing process?

A: Yes, both use the 14 nm process node and are fabricated by Intel. They also share the same die size of 126 mm² and the same Coffee Lake architecture.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i3-9320 has an average benchmark score of 1808, compared to the Intel Xeon E-2224’s 1762. The i3-9320 is ahead by about 2.6 percent in this aggregate measure.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share a great deal of architectural DNA. They are both built on the Coffee Lake architecture, use the 14 nm process node, and are manufactured by Intel. The die size is identical at 126 mm² for both chips. Each has four cores and four threads, with the same cache hierarchy: 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not a supported feature.

The differences are subtle but present. The Core i3-9320 belongs to the Core i3 generation, specifically the Coffee Lake Refresh, while the Xeon E-2224 is part of the Xeon E-2200 series, with a codename of Coffee Lake-S WS. The market segments differ as well: the i3-9320 is a desktop processor, whereas the Xeon E-2224 is aimed at server and workstation platforms.

The integrated graphics also differ. The i3-9320 includes UHD Graphics 630, while the Xeon E-2224 has UHD Graphics P630. Both are integrated graphics solutions, but the P630 variant on the Xeon is typically positioned for professional use cases. The memory bandwidth is another point of divergence: the Xeon E-2224 supports 42.7 GB/s, while the i3-9320 is rated at 38.4 GB/s. Both use dual-channel DDR4 memory, so the bandwidth difference likely stems from memory controller tuning or supported memory speeds.

The base and boost clocks are where the two chips diverge most noticeably. The i3-9320 runs at a base clock of 3.70 GHz and boosts to 4.40 GHz. The Xeon E-2224 has a lower base clock of 3.40 GHz but a higher boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The thermal design power also differs: the i3-9320 is rated at 62 watts, while the Xeon E-2224 draws 71 watts. This higher TDP on the Xeon may reflect its intended sustained workload environment, though the benchmark data does not show a performance benefit.

The release dates are close, with the i3-9320 launching on April 22, 2019, and the Xeon E-2224 on May 28, 2019. Both processors are now end-of-life. The part numbers differ: SRF7X for the i3-9320 and SRFAV for the Xeon E-2224. The launch MSRP for the i3-9320 is $154, while the Xeon E-2224 has a launch MSRP of $193.

The Verdict

Looking strictly at the recorded data, the Intel Core i3-9320 is the faster processor in every benchmark that was measured. It wins all six head-to-head tests, with deltas ranging from 2.3 percent to 2.6 percent. The average benchmark score also favors the i3-9320, 1808 versus 1762, and its percentile rank is one point higher at 42 compared to 41. For anyone choosing purely on performance, the i3-9320 is the clear winner.

However, the Xeon E-2224 is not without its strengths. It offers a higher boost clock of 4.60 GHz, which could be beneficial in workloads that rely on short, bursty single-thread activity. It also has higher memory bandwidth at 42.7 GB/s, which may help in memory-intensive tasks that are not captured by the Cinebench suite. The Xeon also carries the server and workstation market segment designation, which may matter for platform validation, stability, or long-term availability in enterprise channels.

The data suggests that the i3-9320 is the better choice for general computing, content creation, and any workload that resembles the Cinebench rendering tests. The Xeon E-2224 may appeal to users who need its specific memory bandwidth advantage or who require a Xeon-branded part for their build, but the benchmark results do not show that it translates into higher performance.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications, though they share the same core count, thread count, cache layout, socket, and process node. The most notable differences are as follows:

• Base clock: The i3-9320 runs at 3.70 GHz, while the Xeon E-2224 runs at 3.40 GHz.
• Boost clock: The Xeon E-2224 boosts to 4.60 GHz, while the i3-9320 boosts to 4.40 GHz.
• TDP: The i3-9320 is rated at 62 watts, and the Xeon E-2224 is rated at 71 watts.
• Memory bandwidth: The Xeon E-2224 supports 42.7 GB/s, while the i3-9320 supports 38.4 GB/s.
• Integrated graphics: The i3-9320 has UHD Graphics 630, and the Xeon E-2224 has UHD Graphics P630.
• Market segment: The i3-9320 is a desktop part, while the Xeon E-2224 is for server and workstation use.
• Generation: The i3-9320 is from the Core i3 (Coffee Lake Refresh) generation, and the Xeon E-2224 is from the Xeon E (Coffee Lake) generation.
• Release date: The i3-9320 launched on April 22, 2019; the Xeon E-2224 launched on May 28, 2019.
• Launch MSRP: The i3-9320 has a launch MSRP of $154, and the Xeon E-2224 has a launch MSRP of $193.
• Part number: The i3-9320 is SRF7X, and the Xeon E-2224 is SRFAV.

The memory bus is dual-channel for both, and both support ECC memory. The PCIe configuration is identical: Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The L1, L2, and L3 cache sizes are the same for both chips, as are the die size and process node.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i3-9320 wins in every measured benchmark, but the wins are not large. It leads by 2.6 percent in multi-core tests across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, and by 2.3 to 2.6 percent in single-core tests. The i3-9320 also has a higher base clock and a lower TDP, which may make it more efficient in lightly threaded workloads or in systems where thermal headroom is limited. Its lower launch MSRP also positions it as the more accessible option for desktop builders.

The Intel Xeon E-2224 does not win any benchmark in the recorded data, but it has advantages that are not reflected in Cinebench scores. Its higher boost clock of 4.60 GHz could favor workloads that are sensitive to maximum turbo frequency, such as certain single-threaded applications that run for short durations. The higher memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s may help in tasks like data compression, in-memory databases, or scientific computing that stress memory throughput beyond what Cinebench measures. The Xeon’s server and workstation classification also suggests it may be validated for longer operational lifetimes or specific reliability standards, though the database does not include those metrics.

For rendering and CPU-bound tasks, the i3-9320 is the better performer. For users who need a Xeon-branded processor for platform reasons or who expect to leverage the higher memory bandwidth, the E-2224 remains a viable option, but the data does not show it outperforming the i3-9320 in any standard benchmark test.