Intel Core i5-1030NG7 vs Intel Xeon E3-1240L v3 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon E3-1240L v3 wins every recorded benchmark in this comparison. Across all six Cinebench tests, the Xeon takes the top spot, with the Core i5-1030NG7 trailing by a narrow margin each time. The wins are consistent, but they are also small. The largest gap is 1.8% in Cinebench R20 single-core, while the smallest is 1.4% in Cinebench R23 multi-core. The Xeon leads by 1.5% in the R15 multi-core, R15 single-core, R20 multi-core, and R23 single-core tests.

The data does not show any workload category where the Core i5-1030NG7 pulls ahead. Its benchmark scores are close enough that the Core i5 is not far behind, but it never reaches the top in any of the six results. In the database, the Xeon records 6 wins out of 6 head-to-head matchups. There is no split between single-threaded and multi-threaded strengths; the Xeon wins both types of tests.

The average benchmark score tells a similar story. The Xeon E3-1240L v3 has an average score of 1396, while the Core i5-1030NG7 sits at 1376. That is a 20-point gap, which is about 1.5% of the Xeon's average. The percentile rankings also align: the Xeon sits at the 37th percentile among all CPUs, while the Core i5 sits at the 36th percentile. The difference is one percentile point, meaning both parts land in the same general performance tier.

For users looking at pure compute performance, the Xeon is the winner in every recorded test. The Core i5-1030NG7 is not without merit, but its strengths lie elsewhere, particularly in platform characteristics rather than in raw benchmark scores.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from very different design generations and target different market segments. The Intel Xeon E3-1240L v3 is a Haswell architecture part, specifically Haswell-WS, built on a 22 nm process node. It belongs to the Xeon E3 family and is classified as a Server/Workstation processor. The Core i5-1030NG7 uses the Ice Lake architecture, specifically Ice Lake-Y, built on a 10 nm process node. It belongs to the Core i5 family with the Sunny Cove-Y microarchitecture and is classified as a Mobile processor.

The transistor counts differ as well. The Xeon has 1,400 million transistors on a 160 mm² die. The Core i5 does not have a transistor count listed in the database, but its die size is smaller at 123 mm². The difference in process node and die size reflects the generational gap between the two designs.

Cache layouts also differ. The Xeon provides 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core i5 provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, but only 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Xeon has more L3 cache, while the Core i5 has more L1 cache per core.

Memory support is another major divider. The Xeon uses DDR3 memory on a dual-channel bus with 25.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Core i5 uses DDR4 memory on a dual-channel bus with 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth. That is exactly double the memory bandwidth of the Xeon. The Core i5 also has integrated graphics, an Iris Plus solution with 64 execution units, while the Xeon has no integrated graphics listed.

ECC memory support also separates the two. The Xeon supports ECC memory, while the Core i5 does not. The Xeon uses the Intel Socket 1150, while the Core i5 uses Intel BGA 1044, which is a soldered mobile socket. The Xeon's PCIe interface is described as Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Core i5's is simply listed as Gen 3 without a lane count.

The release dates are far apart. The Xeon was released in May 2014, while the Core i5 was released in March 2020. Both are classified as end-of-life, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are remarkably consistent. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 486 against the Core i5's 479, a 1.5% advantage. In the same test's single-core variant, the Xeon scores 68 against 67, also a 1.5% lead. The Xeon wins both, but the scores are nearly tied.

Cinebench R20 shows a similar pattern. The Xeon scores 2027 in multi-core, while the Core i5 scores 1998, a 1.5% gap. In single-core, the Xeon scores 286 against 281, which is a slightly larger 1.8% lead. This is the biggest margin in the entire comparison.

Cinebench R23 repeats the trend. The Xeon scores 4827 in multi-core against the Core i5's 4759, a 1.4% gap. In single-core, the Xeon scores 681 against 671, a 1.5% lead. The margins are tight throughout, but they are also consistent. The Xeon does not lose a single test.

The narrowness of the margins is worth emphasizing. A 1.8% lead in single-core performance is not a dramatic difference. The Xeon's higher base clock of 2.00 GHz versus 1.10 GHz likely contributes to its lead in single-threaded tests, while the Core i5's higher boost clock of 3.50 GHz versus 3.00 GHz is not enough to overcome the Xeon's advantage in these recorded results. However, the database does not attribute causality, only the scores.

The average benchmark score reinforces the pattern. The Xeon's 1396 average is 1.5% higher than the Core i5's 1376. In the nearest rival lists, the Xeon's closest competitor is the Intel Core i5-6500TE with an average score of 1399, a 0.2% difference. The Core i5-1030NG7's closest competitor is the Intel Core i5-4690 with an average score of 1375, a 0.1% difference. Both parts sit in a crowded field of similarly performing CPUs.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core performance?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1240L v3 wins all three single-core Cinebench tests. It scores 68 in R15 single-core, 286 in R20 single-core, and 681 in R23 single-core, while the Core i5-1030NG7 scores 67, 281, and 671 respectively.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each processor provide?

A: The Xeon E3-1240L v3 supports DDR3 memory with 25.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Core i5-1030NG7 supports DDR4 memory with 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth, which is exactly double the Xeon's bandwidth.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Xeon E3-1240L v3 supports ECC memory, while the Core i5-1030NG7 does not.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The Xeon E3-1240L v3 has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core i5-1030NG7 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor?

A: The Xeon E3-1240L v3 has an average benchmark score of 1396, placing it at the 37th percentile. The Core i5-1030NG7 has an average benchmark score of 1376, placing it at the 36th percentile.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Core i5-1030NG7 includes Iris Plus graphics with 64 execution units. The Xeon E3-1240L v3 has no integrated graphics listed in the database.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in almost every major specification field. The Xeon E3-1240L v3 has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 3.00 GHz. The Core i5-1030NG7 has a base clock of 1.10 GHz and a boost clock of 3.50 GHz. The Xeon starts higher, but the Core i5 boosts further.

Thermal design power differs substantially. The Xeon has a TDP of 25 watts, while the Core i5 has a TDP of 10 watts. The Core i5 uses less than half the power budget of the Xeon. This aligns with their market segments: the Xeon is a server/workstation part, while the Core i5 is a mobile processor.

The sockets are incompatible. The Xeon uses Intel Socket 1150, while the Core i5 uses Intel BGA 1044. The Xeon is a Haswell-WS part on a 22 nm process, while the Core i5 is an Ice Lake-Y part on a 10 nm process. The Xeon has 1,400 million transistors on a 160 mm² die, while the Core i5 has no listed transistor count on a 123 mm² die.

Cache configurations differ. The Xeon has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core i5 has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Memory support differs. The Xeon uses DDR3 with 25.6 GB/s bandwidth and supports ECC. The Core i5 uses DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth and does not support ECC. The Xeon's PCIe is Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes, while the Core i5's is simply Gen 3. The Core i5 has Iris Plus graphics with 64 execution units, while the Xeon has no integrated graphics listed.

The release dates are also far apart: the Xeon launched in May 2014, while the Core i5 launched in March 2020. The Xeon has a launch MSRP of $278, while the Core i5 has no listed launch MSRP. Both parts are end-of-life, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear, if narrow, winner. The Intel Xeon E3-1240L v3 wins all six head-to-head benchmarks and has a higher average benchmark score. It is the faster processor in both single-core and multi-core Cinebench tests. Users who prioritize raw compute performance in the recorded workloads should choose the Xeon.

The Core i5-1030NG7 is not the faster processor, but it is the more efficient one. Its 10 watt TDP is less than half of the Xeon's 25 watt TDP. It also provides double the memory bandwidth at 51.2 GB/s versus 25.6 GB/s, and it includes integrated Iris Plus graphics with 64 execution units. For a mobile platform, these features matter. The Xeon's lack of integrated graphics means a separate GPU is required, which is typical for a server or workstation part.

The Xeon is the choice for ECC memory support, which the database confirms the Core i5 lacks. The Xeon also has more L3 cache at 8 MB versus 6 MB. The Core i5 counters with a smaller process node, a smaller die, and a higher boost clock.

The final decision depends on the platform. For a server or workstation build on Socket 1150 with DDR3 memory, the Xeon E3-1240L v3 is the better performer with ECC support. For a mobile or low-power system on BGA 1044 with DDR4 memory, the Core i5-1030NG7 offers lower power consumption, integrated graphics, and double the memory bandwidth, while trailing by roughly 1.5% in every recorded benchmark. The Xeon wins on performance; the Core i5 wins on efficiency and platform features.