Intel Core i7-3740QM vs Intel Xeon E3-1220 v5 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data paints a surprisingly consistent picture across every Cinebench generation. The Intel Core i7-3740QM wins all six head-to-head benchmark comparisons, though by remarkably narrow margins. The most lopsided result is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the i7-3740QM scores 69 against the Xeon E3-1220 v5's 68, a delta of -1.4% from the Xeon's perspective. This is the only test where the gap exceeds one percentage point.

In multi-core workloads, the two processors are virtually indistinguishable. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 489 for the i7-3740QM versus 488 for the Xeon, a delta of -0.2%. Cinebench R20 multi-core repeats this pattern with 2040 against 2034, a -0.3% delta. The R23 multi-core test delivers 4859 versus 4845, again -0.3%. Single-core results in R20 and R23 are equally tight: 288 versus 287 and 686 versus 684, respectively, both at -0.3%.

What does this mean for the overall picture? The average benchmark score in the database places the Xeon at 1401 and the i7-3740QM at 1378, a difference of roughly 1.7% in the Xeon's favor. This apparent contradiction with the head-to-head results is explained by the i7-3740QM having an additional Geekbench entry in its benchmark set, which pulls its average down. The Xeon's percentile ranking is 37, while the i7-3740QM sits at 36, meaning both processors occupy nearly identical positions relative to all CPUs in the database.

The Xeon's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon E-2104G at 1402 (0% delta) and the Intel Core i5-6500TE at 1399 (0.1% delta). The i7-3740QM's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 at 1379 (0% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 2300U at 1379 (-0.1% delta). These comparison clusters confirm that both chips compete in the same performance tier, despite their very different origins.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data shows no workload category where the Xeon E3-1220 v5 emerges victorious. The i7-3740QM wins every single recorded test, but the margins are so small that they fall within run-to-run variation in most cases. The largest advantage for the i7-3740QM appears in Cinebench R15 single-core, where it leads by 1.4%. This is the only test where the difference exceeds 1%.

Consider the implications for real-world use. In multi-threaded rendering tasks, the i7-3740QM's 8 threads versus the Xeon's 4 threads should theoretically provide an advantage, yet the R23 multi-core score only differs by 14 points out of 4859. This suggests that the Xeon's higher base clock of 3.00 GHz, combined with its newer Skylake architecture, compensates almost entirely for the thread count disadvantage. The i7-3740QM does have a higher boost clock at 3.70 GHz versus 3.50 GHz, which helps close the gap in single-threaded work.

For single-threaded tasks, the i7-3740QM holds a consistent but tiny edge across all three Cinebench versions. The R15 single-core score of 69 versus 68 is the most pronounced, while R20 and R23 both show a 1-point difference. This consistency suggests the i7-3740QM's architecture, despite being older, delivers slightly better per-thread performance in these specific workloads.

The Xeon's only statistical advantage appears in the aggregate average benchmark score, where it reaches 1401 against 1378. This is driven by the absence of Geekbench results for the Xeon in the database, not by any head-to-head victory. In direct comparisons, the data shows a clean sweep for the mobile chip.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors spans three major Intel generations. The Xeon E3-1220 v5 uses Skylake architecture on a 14 nm process node, manufactured by Intel with 1,750 million transistors on a 122 mm² die. The i7-3740QM uses Ivy Bridge on a 22 nm process, with 1,400 million transistors on a larger 160 mm² die. The newer process node allows the Xeon to pack more transistors into less silicon, which explains its lower die size despite having more cache.

Cache configurations differ meaningfully. Both share 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core, but the Xeon carries 8 MB of shared L3 cache versus 6 MB for the i7-3740QM. This 33% L3 cache advantage for the Xeon could benefit workloads with larger working sets, though the benchmark data does not isolate this effect.

The Xeon supports ECC memory, a feature absent from the i7-3740QM. This positions the Xeon for server and workstation reliability requirements. Memory support also diverges: the Xeon accepts both DDR3 and DDR4 with dual-channel configuration and a measured memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. The i7-3740QM's memory support is not recorded in the database, and its memory bandwidth is likewise unlisted. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the Xeon's DDR4 support represents a significant generational advantage.

Integrated graphics further separate the two. The i7-3740QM includes Intel HD 4000 graphics, while the Xeon E3-1220 v5 has no integrated graphics capability recorded. This makes the i7-3740QM a self-contained mobile solution, whereas the Xeon requires a discrete GPU. The Xeon's PCIe implementation supports Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the i7-3740QM's PCIe details are not recorded.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every recorded specification. The Xeon E3-1220 v5 operates with 4 cores and 4 threads, while the i7-3740QM offers 4 cores and 8 threads through Hyper-Threading. Base clocks are 3.00 GHz for the Xeon and 2.70 GHz for the i7-3740QM, but boost clocks reverse the order: 3.50 GHz versus 3.70 GHz.

Thermal design power presents the starkest contrast. The Xeon draws 80 W, while the i7-3740QM is rated at 45 W. This difference reflects their intended markets: the Xeon targets server/workstation deployments where power is less constrained, while the i7-3740QM is a mobile processor designed for laptops. Socket compatibility reinforces this split: the Xeon uses Intel Socket 1151, while the i7-3740QM uses Intel BGA 1224, a soldered mobile package.

The Xeon is marked as end-of-life with an October 2015 release date and a launch MSRP of $203. The i7-3740QM's production status is not recorded, but its release date is September 2012, making it three years older. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The Xeon's part number is SR2LG, while the i7-3740QM's part number is not recorded. The Xeon targets the server/workstation market segment, while the i7-3740QM is explicitly a mobile part.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better multi-core performance according to the recorded data?

A: The Intel Core i7-3740QM wins every multi-core benchmark, but by tiny margins. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 4859 versus the Xeon's 4845, a difference of only 0.3%.

Q: Is the Xeon E3-1220 v5 a better single-core performer?

A: No. The i7-3740QM also wins all single-core tests. The largest margin is in Cinebench R15 single-core (69 versus 68), while R20 and R23 show 288 versus 287 and 686 versus 684 respectively.

Q: Why does the Xeon have a higher average benchmark score if it loses every head-to-head test?

A: The Xeon's average benchmark score of 1401 versus 1378 for the i7-3740QM comes from different benchmark sets. The i7-3740QM includes Geekbench results (1993 multi-core, 599 single-core) in its average, which are not recorded for the Xeon.

Q: What are the thread count differences between these two CPUs?

A: Both have 4 physical cores, but the i7-3740QM supports 8 threads while the Xeon E3-1220 v5 supports only 4 threads. Despite this, multi-core benchmark scores are nearly identical.

Q: Which processor consumes less power?

A: The i7-3740QM is rated at 45 W TDP, significantly lower than the Xeon's 80 W. This reflects the i7-3740QM's mobile design target.

Q: Does the Xeon support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Xeon E3-1220 v5 supports ECC memory and accepts both DDR3 and DDR4. The i7-3740QM does not support ECC memory, and its memory support details are not recorded.

The Verdict

The data presents an unusual case where two processors from different eras and market segments produce nearly identical benchmark results. The Intel Core i7-3740QM wins all six direct comparisons, but the maximum victory margin is 1.4% and most are 0.3% or less. In practical terms, users would struggle to distinguish these processors in blind testing.

Pick the Intel Xeon E3-1220 v5 if your requirements include ECC memory support, DDR4 compatibility, or a server/workstation platform with Socket 1151. The Xeon also offers a larger 8 MB L3 cache and a smaller die size on a more advanced 14 nm process. Its 80 W TDP indicates it is designed for systems where power efficiency is secondary to reliability and memory flexibility.

Pick the Intel Core i7-3740QM if you need integrated graphics (Intel HD 4000), lower power consumption at 45 W, or a mobile form factor with BGA 1224 socket. The i7-3740QM's 8 threads provide a theoretical throughput advantage, and its higher boost clock of 3.70 GHz gives it a slight edge in every recorded benchmark. Its older 22 nm process and 6 MB L3 cache are compensated by these wins, however marginal.

The percentile rankings tell the final story: 37 for the Xeon and 36 for the i7-3740QM. These processors are effectively peers in the database's performance hierarchy. The choice between them should be driven entirely by platform requirements, not raw performance, because the benchmark data shows no meaningful performance gap. If a system must use Socket 1151 with ECC memory, the Xeon is the only option. If a mobile platform with integrated graphics is required, the i7-3740QM is the answer. For everything else, their recorded scores are too close to matter.