Intel Core i7-3720QM vs Intel Xeon E3-1220 v5 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the two processors compare in overall benchmark scores?

A: The Intel Core i7-3720QM has an average benchmark score of 1421, while the Intel Xeon E3-1220 v5 scores 1401. The i7-3720QM sits 0.1% behind the Xeon Bronze 3106 (1422) and 0.2% ahead of the Core i7-2700K (1419), while the Xeon E3-1220 v5 matches the Xeon E-2104G (1402) and trails the Pentium Gold G7400TE (1404) by 0.2%.

Q: Which processor wins in single-core performance?

A: The Xeon E3-1220 v5 wins every single-core test. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 684 versus 666 for the i7-3720QM, a 2.6% advantage. The gap is similar in R20 (287 vs 279, 2.8% ahead) and R15 (68 vs 66, 2.9% ahead).

Q: Does the i7-3720QM have any benchmark wins at all?

A: No. In the head-to-head comparison across six Cinebench tests (R15, R20, and R23, both multi-core and single-core), the Xeon E3-1220 v5 wins all six. The i7-3720QM records zero wins, with losses ranging from 2.6% to 2.9% depending on the test.

Q: What memory features does each processor support?

A: The Xeon E3-1220 v5 supports DDR3 and DDR4 memory with ECC (Error-Correcting Code) capability and a memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. The i7-3720QM supports dual-channel memory but has no ECC support and no listed memory bandwidth figure.

Q: Which processor has a higher core count or thread count?

A: Both have 4 physical cores, but the i7-3720QM has 8 threads due to Hyper-Threading, while the Xeon E3-1220 v5 has only 4 threads. Despite the thread disadvantage, the Xeon still wins all multi-core benchmarks.

Q: What are the production statuses of these chips?

A: The Xeon E3-1220 v5 is listed as "End-of-life" in the database, while the i7-3720QM has no explicit production status recorded. The i7 was released in April 2012, and the Xeon in October 2015.

Architecture Differences

The i7-3720QM is built on Intel's Ivy Bridge architecture using a 22 nm process node, while the Xeon E3-1220 v5 uses the newer Skylake architecture on a 14 nm node. This process shrink is significant: the Xeon packs 1,750 million transistors into a 122 mm² die, whereas the i7 uses 1,400 million transistors across a larger 160 mm² die. The Skylake design achieves higher density and presumably better power efficiency per transistor, though the Xeon's TDP is higher at 80 watts versus 45 watts for the mobile i7.

The cache hierarchies differ notably. Both have 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core, but the Xeon offers 8 MB of shared L3 cache versus 6 MB on the i7. This 33% larger L3 cache could explain part of the Xeon's consistent lead in single-threaded tests, as more data can reside closer to the cores.

The integrated graphics situation is a major architectural split. The i7-3720QM includes Intel HD 4000 graphics, while the Xeon E3-1220 v5 has no integrated GPU at all. This makes the i7 a self-contained mobile solution, while the Xeon requires a discrete graphics card for any display output.

Memory support diverges sharply. The Xeon supports both DDR3 and DDR4 with ECC memory, a feature critical for server and workstation reliability. The i7 lacks ECC entirely. The Xeon also has a specified memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s, while the i7's memory bandwidth is not recorded in the database.

The socket and market positioning differ completely. The i7 uses Intel BGA 1224, a soldered mobile socket, while the Xeon uses Intel Socket 1151, a desktop/server platform. The i7 targets mobile computing, the Xeon targets server and workstation deployments. The Xeon also supports PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the i7's PCIe configuration is not listed.

The Verdict

The data points clearly to the Xeon E3-1220 v5 as the better performer in every measured benchmark. Across six Cinebench tests, it wins by margins of 2.6% to 2.9%, whether the workload is single-threaded or multi-threaded. This consistency suggests the Skylake architecture's IPC advantage, larger L3 cache, and higher base clock (3.00 GHz vs 2.60 GHz) outweigh the i7's thread count advantage.

However, the verdict depends heavily on the use case. For mobile users who need a processor with integrated graphics, the i7-3720QM is the only option that makes sense; the Xeon has no iGPU and is not socketed for laptops. For server or workstation builders who value ECC memory support and don't need integrated graphics, the Xeon is the clear choice. The i7's 45 watt TDP also makes it far more suitable for thermally constrained environments, though its lower performance ceiling is evident.

The Xeon's end-of-life production status matters for long-term availability, but the i7's lack of a recorded production status leaves that comparison open. The Xeon also carries a launch MSRP of $203, which the database notes as a single reference point without further commentary.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i7-3720QM | Intel Xeon E3-1220 v5 |

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

| Cores | 4 | 4 |

| Threads | 8 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 2.60 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.60 GHz | 3.50 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 80 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1224 | Intel Socket 1151 |

| Architecture | Ivy Bridge | Skylake |

| Process Node | 22 nm | 14 nm |

| Transistors | 1,400 million | 1,750 million |

| Die Size | 160 mm² | 122 mm² |

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

| Memory Support | Not listed | DDR3, DDR4 |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | Not listed | 34.1 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Not listed | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 4000 | None |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Server/Workstation |

| Production Status | Not listed | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2012-04-28 | 2015-10-18 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | $203 |

| Part Number | SR0MM | SR2LG |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Xeon E3-1220 v5 dominates the head-to-head results, winning all six recorded Cinebench comparisons. The closest margin is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Xeon scores 4845 against the i7's 4718, a 2.6% gap. The same 2.6% delta appears in R20 multi-core (2034 vs 1981). The largest single margin is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the Xeon leads 68 to 66, a 2.9% difference.

Single-core results show a remarkably consistent pattern. In R15, the Xeon's 68 beats the i7's 66. In R20, it is 287 versus 279. In R23, it is 684 versus 666. Each time, the Xeon leads by roughly 2.6% to 2.9%. This consistency across different Cinebench versions suggests the Skylake core design delivers a steady IPC improvement over Ivy Bridge.

Multi-core results are more interesting because the i7 has 8 threads versus the Xeon's 4. Despite having twice the thread count, the i7 still loses. In R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 488 versus 475, a 2.7% win. In R20, it is 2034 versus 1981 (2.6%). In R23, it is 4845 versus 4718 (2.6%). The thread advantage is not enough to overcome the Xeon's higher clock speeds and newer architecture.

The i7's best showing relative to the Xeon is in R20 and R23 multi-core, where the delta is 2.6%, the smallest margin. The i7's worst showing is in R15 single-core at 2.9%. There is no test where the i7 comes within 2% of the Xeon, and no test where the Xeon leads by more than 3%.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon E3-1220 v5 wins in every scenario where raw CPU performance is the sole criterion. Its 3.00 GHz base clock and 3.50 GHz boost clock, combined with 8 MB of L3 cache and the Skylake architecture, produce superior results in both lightly threaded and fully threaded workloads. The Xeon also wins for users who require ECC memory support, as the i7 cannot provide this reliability feature.

The Xeon additionally wins for server and workstation deployments where the Socket 1151 platform offers upgradeability and standard desktop components. Its PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only) provides direct connectivity for discrete GPUs or NVMe storage. The 34.1 GB/s memory bandwidth figure indicates a well-specified memory subsystem.

The i7-3720QM wins in scenarios where power consumption is critical. Its 45 watt TDP is nearly half the Xeon's 80 watts, making it suitable for compact laptops and other thermally limited designs. The integrated Intel HD 4000 graphics eliminate the need for a separate GPU, which is essential for mobile systems where space and battery life matter.

The i7 also wins on thread count, offering 8 threads versus 4, which could benefit specific workloads that scale with thread count but are not captured in the Cinebench results. However, the recorded data shows no benchmark where this advantage translates into a win.

For users building a system today, the Xeon's end-of-life status versus the i7's unlisted status creates uncertainty. The Xeon's launch MSRP of $203 provides a reference point, but the i7 has no such figure. Ultimately, the choice comes down to platform: mobile users must pick the i7, while server builders get the better performer in the Xeon.