Intel Core i3-9350K vs Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database records a clean sweep for the Intel Core i3-9350K across all six Cinebench tests. The margins are consistent, with the newer desktop chip leading by roughly 2% in every workload. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i3-9350K scores 650 against the Xeon E5-1630 v3's 635, a 2.3% advantage. The single-core result is similarly close: 91 versus 89, a 2.2% gap. Moving to Cinebench R20, the i3-9350K posts 2711 in multi-core versus 2647 for the Xeon, and 382 versus 373 in single-core, both representing a 2.4% lead. The pattern holds in Cinebench R23, where the i3-9350K reaches 6456 multi-core and 911 single-core, against the Xeon's 6303 and 889. Every recorded delta sits between 2.2% and 2.4%, indicating a steady, workload-independent advantage rather than a scenario-specific one.

The aggregate benchmark scores reinforce this picture. The i3-9350K has an average benchmark score of 1867, while the Xeon E5-1630 v3 averages 1823. That is a roughly 2.4% overall difference. Both processors land at the 42nd percentile among all CPUs in the database, so they occupy the same performance tier. The Xeon's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-4790S at 1827 (0.2% ahead) and the Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 at 1817 (0.3% behind), placing it in a tightly packed group. The i3-9350K's nearest rivals are similarly close: the Intel Xeon E5-1630 v4 at 1869 (0.1% ahead) and the Intel Core i5-1035G4 at 1861 (0.3% behind). In short, neither chip is an outlier among its peers, but the i3-9350K consistently sits on the higher side of the cluster.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different eras and design philosophies. The Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 is built on the Haswell architecture, specifically Haswell-EP, using Intel's 22 nm process node. It packs 2,600 million transistors on a 356 mm² die. The Intel Core i3-9350K uses the Coffee Lake architecture, a refinement of the 14 nm process, and its die measures just 126 mm². The transistor count for the i3-9350K is not recorded in the database, but the die size difference is stark: the Xeon's server-oriented die is nearly three times larger.

Core and thread configurations also diverge. Both are four-core parts, but the Xeon supports eight threads via Hyper-Threading, while the i3-9350K has only four threads. The Xeon's base clock is 3.70 GHz with a boost of 3.80 GHz, whereas the i3-9350K starts at 4.00 GHz and boosts to 4.60 GHz. The i3's higher clocks compensate for its lack of simultaneous multithreading in the recorded benchmarks, though the theoretical ceiling for parallel work favors the Xeon's extra threads.

Cache hierarchies differ as well. Both have 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core. The shared L3 cache is 10 MB on the Xeon versus 8 MB on the i3-9350K. Memory support is a major differentiator: the Xeon uses quad-channel DDR4 with a recorded bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s, while the i3-9350K uses dual-channel DDR4 at 38.4 GB/s. Both support ECC memory, a rare feature for a desktop chip like the i3. PCIe lane counts also separate them: the Xeon provides 40 Gen 3 lanes from the CPU, while the i3 offers 16 Gen 3 lanes. The i3-9350K includes integrated UHD 630 graphics; the Xeon has no integrated graphics at all.

Production status and release dates confirm their different lifecycles. The Xeon E5-1630 v3 launched on September 7, 2014, targeted at the server and workstation segment. The i3-9350K launched on April 22, 2019, as a desktop part. Both are now end-of-life products. The i3-9350K has an unlocked multiplier, while the Xeon does not. The i3's launch MSRP is $184; no launch price is recorded for the Xeon.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i3-9350K boosts to 4.60 GHz, while the Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 boosts to 3.80 GHz.

Q: Does the Xeon E5-1630 v3 support more memory bandwidth?

A: Yes. The Xeon uses quad-channel DDR4 with 68.3 GB/s bandwidth, compared to the i3-9350K's dual-channel 38.4 GB/s.

Q: Are both processors end-of-life?

A: Yes, the database lists both the Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 and the Intel Core i3-9350K as end-of-life products.

Q: Which chip has more threads?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 has 8 threads, while the Intel Core i3-9350K has 4 threads.

Q: Does the i3-9350K have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it includes Intel UHD 630 graphics. The Xeon E5-1630 v3 has no integrated graphics.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The i3-9350K averages 1867, while the Xeon averages 1823. That is a 2.4% difference in favor of the i3.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 | Intel Core i3-9350K |

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

| Architecture | Haswell-EP | Coffee Lake |

| Process Node | 22 nm | 14 nm |

| Die Size | 356 mm² | 126 mm² |

| Transistors | 2,600 million | Not recorded |

| Threads | 8 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 3.70 GHz | 4.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.80 GHz | 4.60 GHz |

| TDP | 140 W | 91 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 | Intel Socket 1151 |

| L3 Cache | 10 MB (shared) | 8 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bus | Quad-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 68.3 GB/s | 38.4 GB/s |

| PCIe Lanes | Gen 3, 40 lanes | Gen 3, 16 lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | None | UHD 630 |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2014-09-07 | 2019-04-22 |

| Unlocked Multiplier | No | Yes |

| Part Number | QFSVSR20L | SRCZT |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $184 |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i3-9350K wins in every recorded benchmark. It holds a 2.3% lead in Cinebench R15 multi-core and a 2.2% lead in R15 single-core. In Cinebench R20 and R23, both multi-core and single-core tests show a 2.4% advantage for the i3. The consistency of these margins suggests the i3's higher clock speeds (4.00 GHz base, 4.60 GHz boost) overcome the Xeon's extra threads and larger cache in these particular workloads. The i3 also benefits from a much lower TDP at 91 W versus the Xeon's 140 W, making it the more power-efficient choice on paper. Its unlocked multiplier adds flexibility for users who want to push clocks higher, and the integrated UHD 630 graphics eliminate the need for a discrete GPU in basic display scenarios.

The Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3, despite losing every head-to-head test, has structural advantages that matter outside the Cinebench suite. Its quad-channel memory interface delivers 68.3 GB/s of bandwidth, nearly double the i3's 38.4 GB/s. That can be decisive for memory-bound server or workstation tasks. The Xeon also provides 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes versus 16 on the i3, enabling more expansion cards, storage controllers, or GPUs. Both chips support ECC memory, but the Xeon's server heritage makes it the more natural fit for validated workstation platforms. The Xeon's larger 10 MB L3 cache and 8 threads give it a theoretical edge in highly parallel, cache-sensitive workloads, even if the recorded Cinebench results do not reflect it. Its 22 nm process and larger die (356 mm² versus 126 mm²) are older, but the platform itself is built for sustained throughput in multi-socket or high-availability environments.

The database percentile ranks both at 42, meaning they sit at the same level relative to all CPUs. The i3-9350K's nearest rival is the Xeon E5-1630 v4 at 1869, just 0.1% higher, while the Xeon E5-1630 v3's nearest rival is the Core i7-4790S at 1827, 0.2% higher. For a desktop user prioritizing single-thread responsiveness, overclocking headroom, and lower power draw, the i3-9350K is the clear pick. For a workstation builder needing maximum memory bandwidth, PCIe expansion, and ECC stability in a server-grade package, the Xeon E5-1630 v3 remains relevant despite its benchmark deficit. The recorded data shows a narrow but uniform performance gap, and the choice ultimately hinges on platform features rather than raw Cinebench numbers.