Intel Core i3-9320 vs Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 and the Intel Core i3-9320 are remarkably close in raw compute performance, despite coming from different eras and market segments. The data shows that the Xeon wins all six head-to-head benchmark comparisons, but by margins so thin they are effectively negligible for real-world workloads. The Core i3-9320, however, counters with a much higher boost clock and a more modern platform, making the choice between them a matter of specific feature requirements rather than overwhelming performance differences.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are a study in statistical near-identity. In the Cinebench R15 multi-core test, the Xeon E3-1505M v5 scores 633 against the Core i3-9320’s 630, a delta of just 0.5%. The single-core test is similarly close, with the Xeon posting 89 versus 88 for the i3, a 1.1% advantage. This pattern holds across every generation of the Cinebench test suite. In Cinebench R20, the Xeon leads 2639 to 2626 in multi-core (0.5%) and 372 to 370 in single-core (0.5%). Moving to Cinebench R23, the Xeon again edges ahead by 6284 to 6254 in multi-core (0.5%) and 887 to 882 in single-core (0.6%).

The consistency of these results is telling. The Xeon’s largest win is a 1.1% margin in the R15 single-core test, which is within typical run-to-run variance. The data indicates that in purely computational throughput, there is no meaningful winner. The Xeon’s 4 cores and 8 threads give it a theoretical multi-threading advantage over the i3’s 4 cores and 4 threads, but the i3’s higher clock speeds—3.70 GHz base and 4.40 GHz boost versus the Xeon’s 2.80 GHz base and 3.70 GHz boost—compensate almost perfectly. The average benchmark score for the Xeon is 1817, while the i3 sits at 1808. In the nearest rivals list, the i3-9320 is the closest competitor to the Xeon, with a deltaPct of 0.5%. Both processors occupy the 42nd percentile of all CPUs, confirming their peer-level standing.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon E3-1505M v5 wins every benchmark test, but the margins are so small that the practical takeaway is different. The Xeon’s wins come from its 8 threads, which allow it to handle multi-threaded workloads with slightly more efficiency. The data shows a 0.5% advantage in multi-core tests across R15, R20, and R23, which suggests that applications optimized for high thread counts—such as video encoding or 3D rendering—will see a marginal benefit from the Xeon. The Xeon also supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory, whereas the i3 is limited to DDR4, offering more flexibility for legacy systems.

The Core i3-9320’s wins are not in the benchmark scores but in the platform features and clock speeds. It boosts to 4.40 GHz, a full 700 MHz higher than the Xeon’s 3.70 GHz boost. This makes it the better choice for lightly threaded tasks that rely on single-core burst performance, even if the benchmark scores don’t reflect a decisive advantage. The i3 also has a higher memory bandwidth at 38.4 GB/s versus the Xeon’s 34.1 GB/s, which can benefit memory-intensive applications. For desktop users, the i3’s Socket 1151 platform is more common and upgrade-friendly than the Xeon’s BGA 1440, which is soldered and not upgradeable. The i3 also has a newer integrated GPU, the UHD Graphics 630, compared to the Xeon’s HD Graphics P530.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural families. The Xeon E3-1505M v5 is built on the Skylake-H architecture, a 14 nm process, and belongs to the Xeon E3 (Skylake-H) generation. It was released on 2015-10-26. The Core i3-9320 uses the Coffee Lake architecture, also on a 14 nm process, from the Core i3 (Coffee Lake Refresh) generation, released on 2019-04-22. Both are manufactured by Intel, and both use 4 cores. The Xeon has 8 threads, while the i3 has 4 threads.

The cache configurations are identical in structure: 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The die sizes are close, with the Xeon at 122 mm² and the i3 at 126 mm². The Xeon has a transistor count of 2,300 million, while the i3’s transistor count is not listed. The Xeon’s TDP is 45 watts, significantly lower than the i3’s 62 watts, reflecting its mobile/workstation heritage. The Xeon supports ECC memory, a feature that is also present on the i3, which is unusual for a desktop Core processor. Both use PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Xeon’s memory support includes both DDR3 and DDR4, while the i3 only supports DDR4. The Xeon is a server/workstation part with a BGA 1440 socket, while the i3 is a desktop part with Socket 1151.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i3-9320 has a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, which is significantly higher than the Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5’s boost clock of 3.70 GHz.

Q: Does the Xeon support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i3-9320 also supports ECC memory, according to the data.

Q: How much larger is the Core i3-9320’s memory bandwidth?

A: The Core i3-9320 has a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, which is higher than the Xeon E3-1505M v5’s 34.1 GB/s.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two?

A: The Xeon E3-1505M v5 has an average benchmark score of 1817, while the Core i3-9320 scores 1808. The Xeon leads by 0.5% according to the nearest rivals deltaPct.

Q: Which processor was released more recently?

A: The Core i3-9320 was released on 2019-04-22, while the Xeon E3-1505M v5 was released on 2015-10-26. The i3 is over three years newer.

Q: Do both processors have the same number of cores?

A: Yes, both the Xeon E3-1505M v5 and the Core i3-9320 have 4 cores. However, the Xeon has 8 threads, while the i3 has 4 threads.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the data, the Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 is the winner in every benchmark test, but the margins are too small to justify a definitive recommendation on performance alone. The Xeon’s 8 threads give it a slight edge in multi-threaded workloads, as evidenced by the 0.5% lead across all Cinebench multi-core tests. It also offers a lower TDP of 45 watts, which is a significant advantage for power-constrained systems. For users who need ECC memory support and the ability to use DDR3 or DDR4, the Xeon is the clear choice.

However, the Core i3-9320 is the better pick for most desktop scenarios. Its 4.40 GHz boost clock provides a substantial clock-speed advantage over the Xeon’s 3.70 GHz, which is not reflected in the Cinebench scores but matters for real-world bursty tasks. The i3 also has higher memory bandwidth (38.4 GB/s) and a more modern integrated GPU (UHD Graphics 630). Its Socket 1151 platform is standard for desktop builds, whereas the Xeon’s BGA 1440 socket is proprietary and not upgradeable. The i3’s launch MSRP is $154, while the Xeon’s launch MSRP is $434, though both are now end-of-life products. For a new build, the i3-9320 offers the better platform and clock speed; for a legacy workstation upgrade requiring ECC and lower power, the Xeon is the data-backed choice.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 | Intel Core i3-9320 |

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

| Threads | 8 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 2.80 GHz | 3.70 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.70 GHz | 4.40 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 62 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1440 | Intel Socket 1151 |

| Architecture | Skylake | Coffee Lake |

| Codename | Skylake-H | Coffee Lake |

| Generation | Xeon E3 (Skylake-H) | Core i3 (Coffee Lake Refresh) |

| Die Size | 122 mm² | 126 mm² |

| Memory Support | DDR3, DDR4 | DDR4 |

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

| Integrated Graphics | HD Graphics P530 | UHD Graphics 630 |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2015-10-26 | 2019-04-22 |

| Launch MSRP | $434 | $154 |

| Part Number | SR2FM | SRF7X |