Intel Core i7-3820QM vs Intel Xeon W-2104 Comparison

The Intel Xeon W-2104 and Intel Core i7-3820QM are two processors from different eras and market segments, yet their benchmark scores place them in a near-identical performance tier. The Xeon W-2104, a Skylake-W workstation part from late 2017, faces the Ivy Bridge mobile i7-3820QM from 2012. Despite the five-year gap and different design goals, the data shows a remarkably close contest, with the older mobile chip winning every single head-to-head benchmark iteration by a narrow margin. This comparison highlights how architectural efficiency and threading can offset generational advances and power budgets.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i7-3820QM has a higher average benchmark score of 1366, compared to the Intel Xeon W-2104’s average of 1350. The difference represents a 1.2% advantage for the i7.

Q: How does the Xeon W-2104 compare to its closest rivals?

A: The Xeon W-2104’s average score of 1350 places it within 0.8% of its nearest rivals. It is 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i5-7400T (1348), 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core i5-4670 (1347), and 0.8% ahead of the Intel Core i5-4590T (1340). The Intel Xeon E3-1226 v3 (1357) edges it out by 0.5%.

Q: What is the performance gap between the two chips in multi-core rendering?

A: The Intel Core i7-3820QM leads in all multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 4777 versus the Xeon’s 4669, a 2.3% advantage. The lead is consistent in R20 (2006 vs 1960) and R15 (481 vs 470), with the same 2.3% delta.

Q: Does the Xeon W-2104 win any single-core benchmark?

A: No. The Intel Core i7-3820QM holds the advantage in every single-core test. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the i7 scores 674 against the Xeon’s 659, a 2.2% lead. The margins are 2.5% in R20 (283 vs 276) and 1.5% in R15 (67 vs 66).

Q: What are the memory channel configurations for these processors?

A: The Intel Xeon W-2104 supports quad-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 85.3 GB/s. The Intel Core i7-3820QM supports dual-channel memory, with no specific bandwidth figure listed in the data.

Q: Which processor features integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core i7-3820QM includes Intel HD 4000 integrated graphics. The Intel Xeon W-2104 has no integrated graphics listed, reflecting its server/workstation market segment.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i7-3820QM is the faster processor in every measured workload. It wins all six head-to-head comparisons, with margins ranging from 1.5% to 2.5%. The i7-3820QM’s 4.7% higher average benchmark score (1366 vs 1350) reinforces this consistent lead. For anyone prioritizing raw compute performance in Cinebench tests, the i7-3820QM is the clear pick.

The Xeon W-2104’s case rests on platform features rather than benchmark victories. It offers quad-channel DDR4 memory support with 85.3 GB/s of bandwidth, ECC memory capability, and 48 PCIe Gen 3 lanes. These are server/workstation attributes that the mobile i7-3820QM lacks entirely. The Xeon also has a higher base clock of 3.20 GHz versus 2.70 GHz, though the i7 compensates with a 3.70 GHz boost clock.

The verdict depends on the use case. For a mobile or compact system where the 45W TDP and integrated graphics matter, the i7-3820QM is the only option. For a workstation build requiring ECC memory, quad-channel bandwidth, and extensive PCIe connectivity, the Xeon W-2104’s platform support outweighs its marginal benchmark deficit. The data shows a performance tie at the percentile level — both sit at the 36th percentile among all CPUs — but the i7-3820QM is the benchmark champion.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results show a sweep for the Intel Core i7-3820QM across all six Cinebench tests. The largest single victory comes in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the i7-3820QM scores 283 against the Xeon W-2104’s 276, a 2.5% margin. This is the widest gap in the entire comparison.

In multi-core workloads, the i7-3820QM maintains a steady 2.3% lead. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 4777 for the i7 versus 4669 for the Xeon. Cinebench R20 multi-core produces 2006 versus 1960. Cinebench R15 multi-core results in 481 versus 470. These consistent deltas suggest the i7-3820QM’s eight threads provide a sustained advantage over the Xeon’s four threads in parallel rendering tasks.

Single-core results are tighter but still favor the i7-3820QM. Beyond the R20 gap of 2.5%, R23 single-core shows 674 versus 659, a 2.2% delta. R15 single-core is the closest contest at 67 versus 66, a 1.5% margin. Even at the lowest spread, the older Ivy Bridge chip manages to outpace the newer Skylake-W part.

The Xeon W-2104 records zero wins in this comparison. Its best performance relative to the i7-3820QM comes in R15 single-core, where the 1.5% deficit is its narrowest. Across the board, the data indicates that the i7-3820QM’s combination of a 3.70 GHz boost clock and hyper-threading delivers superior Cinebench results. The Xeon’s higher base clock of 3.20 GHz does not translate into benchmark wins.

Specification Differences

The two processors diverge significantly in their core specifications. The Intel Xeon W-2104 has 4 cores and 4 threads, while the Intel Core i7-3820QM has 4 cores and 8 threads. This doubling of thread count is a primary factor in the i7’s multi-core benchmark victories.

Clock speeds show a split approach. The Xeon W-2104 has a base clock of 3.20 GHz with no boost clock listed. The i7-3820QM has a lower base clock of 2.70 GHz but a boost clock of 3.70 GHz. The i7’s ability to reach higher frequencies under load explains its single-core wins despite the lower base.

Thermal design power differs dramatically. The Xeon W-2104 is rated at 120W, while the i7-3820QM is rated at 45W. This 75W difference underscores their distinct market targets: a workstation CPU versus a mobile processor.

Memory support is another major divider. The Xeon W-2104 supports DDR4 memory over a quad-channel bus with 85.3 GB/s bandwidth. The i7-3820QM supports dual-channel memory with no bandwidth figure provided. ECC memory is supported on the Xeon but not on the i7. The Xeon also provides 48 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, while the i7 has no PCIe lane count listed.

The socket types are incompatible. The Xeon W-2104 uses Intel Socket 2066, while the i7-3820QM uses Intel BGA 1224. The i7 is the only one with integrated graphics, featuring Intel HD 4000. The Xeon has no integrated graphics listed.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two CPUs spans process technology, design era, and feature sets. The Intel Xeon W-2104 is built on the Skylake architecture using a 14 nm process node, manufactured by Intel. Its die size is 484 mm². The Intel Core i7-3820QM uses the Ivy Bridge architecture on a 22 nm process, also by Intel, with a die size of 160 mm² and 1,400 million transistors.

Cache hierarchies differ in L2 and L3 allocation. The Xeon W-2104 has 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 cache per core, with 8.25 MB of shared L3 cache. The i7-3820QM also has 64 KB of L1 per core but only 256 KB of L2 per core, with 8 MB of shared L3. The Xeon’s larger per-core L2 cache and slightly larger L3 do not translate into benchmark superiority.

The generation and codename distinguish their origins. The Xeon W-2104 belongs to the Xeon W (Skylake-W) generation, released in August 2017. The i7-3820QM is from the Core i7 (Ivy Bridge) generation, released in April 2012. The Xeon is marked as end-of-life production status, while the i7’s production status is not listed.

Feature support reflects their divergent roles. The Xeon W-2104 is a server/workstation part with ECC memory support and quad-channel DDR4 memory. The i7-3820QM is a mobile processor with integrated graphics and no ECC support. The Xeon’s process node is smaller (14 nm vs 22 nm), yet it consumes more power and delivers less benchmark performance. The i7-3820QM’s architectural advantage in threading and boost clock overcomes the Xeon’s newer node and larger cache.