Intel Core i7-980X vs Intel Xeon E3-1241 v3 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E3-1241 v3 and the Intel Core i7-980X are both end-of-life processors, yet they represent two distinct philosophies from Intel’s past. The Xeon E3-1241 v3 is a 4-core, 8-thread Haswell part built on a 22 nm process, while the i7-980X is a 6-core, 12-thread Westmere part on a 32 nm process. The data shows a clear, consistent winner across every shared benchmark, but the story is more nuanced than a simple sweep. The Xeon wins all six head-to-head tests, yet the i7-980X offers two more physical cores and twelve threads, raising the question of whether raw core count or architectural efficiency matters more in this matchup.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results are unambiguous: the Intel Xeon E3-1241 v3 wins every single test in the head-to-head comparison. It takes the Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 suites in both multi-core and single-core runs, securing all six wins with no victories for the i7-980X. This means the Xeon is the superior choice for any workload that scales with Cinebench performance, which typically includes 3D rendering, video encoding, and other compute-heavy tasks.

However, the i7-980X is not without its theoretical advantages. It features six physical cores and twelve threads, compared to the Xeon’s four cores and eight threads. In applications that are heavily optimized for multi-threading and can leverage more than eight threads, the i7-980X’s additional cores could potentially close the gap, even though the data here shows it trailing. The i7-980X also has a larger 12 MB shared L3 cache versus the Xeon’s 8 MB, which could benefit workloads with large, reusable datasets. The data does not include tests for such scenarios, so this remains a speculative advantage based on specifications.

For single-threaded performance, the Xeon is the clear victor, which suggests it would be better for older games, legacy software, and tasks that rely on high clock speeds. The Xeon’s base clock of 3.50 GHz and boost clock of 3.90 GHz outpace the i7-980X’s 3.33 GHz base and 3.60 GHz boost, giving it an edge in latency-sensitive applications.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is substantial, spanning several generations. The Xeon E3-1241 v3 is built on the Haswell architecture, using a 22 nm process node, while the i7-980X is from the older Westmere architecture on a 32 nm node. This process advantage allows the Xeon to pack 1,400 million transistors into a 160 mm² die, whereas the i7-980X houses 1,170 million transistors in a much larger 239 mm² die.

Cache configurations also differ. Both have 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, but the L3 cache diverges: the Xeon has 8 MB shared, while the i7-980X has 12 MB shared. This larger cache on the i7-980X could be a boon for certain server-like workloads, but the data does not reflect a benefit in the tested benchmarks.

Memory support presents another key difference. The Xeon supports DDR3 in a dual-channel configuration with a memory bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s, while the i7-980X also supports DDR3 but in a triple-channel setup, with no bandwidth figure provided in the data. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, a critical feature for server and workstation reliability, while the i7-980X does not. The Xeon uses PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), whereas the i7-980X is limited to PCIe Gen 2.

The i7-980X has an unlocked multiplier, making it a candidate for overclocking, while the Xeon’s multiplier is locked. The i7-980X is also classified as a desktop part, while the Xeon is aimed at the server and workstation market segment.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data reveals a remarkably consistent pattern. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 612 against the i7-980X’s 584, a 4.8% advantage. The single-core R15 test shows 86 versus 82, a 4.9% victory for the Xeon. This consistency continues in R20, where the Xeon posts 2550 in multi-core and 359 in single-core, versus 2434 and 343 for the i7-980X, representing 4.8% and 4.7% leads, respectively.

The R23 results follow the same trend. The Xeon achieves 6072 in multi-core and 857 in single-core, while the i7-980X manages 5797 and 818. These are 4.7% and 4.8% advantages for the Xeon. Across all six tests, the deltaPct hovers between 4.7% and 4.9%, suggesting that the Xeon’s architectural efficiency gives it a uniform advantage regardless of the workload intensity.

The i7-980X has additional Geekbench scores in its benchmark list—3247 multi-core and 659 single-core—but these are not part of the head-to-head comparison, meaning the Xeon has no corresponding scores for those tests. The data does not allow for a direct comparison on Geekbench, so those results stand alone.

The average benchmark score tells a similar story. The Xeon has an average score of 1756, while the i7-980X sits at 1746. Both processors rank at the 41st percentile among all CPUs, placing them in the same performance tier despite the Xeon’s consistent wins. The Xeon’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-4790T at 1755, the Intel Core i5-5675C at 1759, and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 3200GE at 1750. The i7-980X’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-8269U at 1748, the Intel Core i5-6600 at 1744, and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 3200GE again at 1750.

The Verdict

The data is unequivocal: the Intel Xeon E3-1241 v3 is the faster processor in every measured benchmark. It leads the i7-980X by roughly 4.8% in both multi-core and single-core workloads across the Cinebench suite. For users prioritizing raw performance in rendering or single-threaded tasks, the Xeon is the only logical choice based on these numbers.

However, the i7-980X should not be dismissed entirely. Its six cores and twelve threads, combined with a larger 12 MB L3 cache, could offer advantages in multi-threaded applications that are not represented in the Cinebench tests. The data does not include benchmarks that specifically stress more than eight threads, so the i7-980X’s potential in such scenarios remains unquantified here.

The Xeon also brings ECC memory support and PCIe Gen 3, making it the better option for server or workstation environments where data integrity and modern connectivity are paramount. The i7-980X’s unlocked multiplier is a point in its favor for enthusiasts willing to overclock, but the data does not include any overclocked results, so its potential in that state is unknown.

Ultimately, the Xeon E3-1241 v3 wins on performance, efficiency, and features. The i7-980X offers more cores and a larger cache, but the benchmark data shows that the Xeon’s newer architecture and higher clock speeds overcome those advantages in the tested scenarios. For anyone choosing between these two based on the available data, the Xeon is the superior pick.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher multi-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1241 v3 scores 6072, while the Intel Core i7-980X scores 5797, giving the Xeon a 4.7% lead.

Q: Does the Intel Core i7-980X win any head-to-head benchmarks?

A: No, the head-to-head data shows the i7-980X wins zero tests, while the Xeon wins all six.

Q: What is the difference in single-core performance between the two?

A: The Xeon leads in all single-core tests, with a 4.9% advantage in Cinebench R15 (86 vs 82) and a 4.8% lead in R23 (857 vs 818).

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1241 v3 supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core i7-980X does not.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Xeon has an average benchmark score of 1756, slightly above the i7-980X’s 1746, and both sit at the 41st percentile among all CPUs.

Q: Is the multiplier unlocked on either processor?

A: The Intel Core i7-980X has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel Xeon E3-1241 v3 does not.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon E3-1241 v3 | Intel Core i7-980X |

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

| Cores | 4 | 6 |

| Threads | 8 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 3.50 GHz | 3.33 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.90 GHz | 3.60 GHz |

| TDP | 80 W | 130 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1150 | Intel Socket 1366 |

| Architecture | Haswell | Westmere |

| Process Node | 22 nm | 32 nm |

| Transistors | 1,400 million | 1,170 million |

| Die Size | 160 mm² | 239 mm² |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | 12 MB (shared) |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | null |

| ECC Memory | true | false |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 2 |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Desktop |

| Launch MSRP | $273 | null |

| Multiplier Unlocked | false | true |