CPU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a clean sweep for the Intel Xeon E-2224, but the margins are remarkably narrow across every Cinebench test. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the E-2224 scores 614 versus 612 for the Xeon E3-1241 v3, a 0.3% lead. The single-core R15 result is a dead tie at 86 points each, with the delta recorded as 0%. That is the only test where the two chips are perfectly level; the newer part wins every other comparison, but the largest advantage anywhere is just 0.6%.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the E-2224 posts 2559 in multi-core against 2550 for the E3-1241 v3, a 0.4% edge. In single-core R20, the margin widens slightly: 361 versus 359, a 0.6% difference. The R23 results follow the same pattern. Multi-core shows 6093 for the E-2224 and 6072 for the E3-1241 v3, another 0.3% gap. Single-core R23 lands at 860 versus 857, a 0.4% lead.

The overall benchmark scores reinforce this picture. The E-2224 averages 1762 across all tests, while the E3-1241 v3 averages 1756. That puts the older chip 0.3% behind in the aggregate. Both parts sit at the 41st percentile of all CPUs tracked, meaning they occupy essentially the same performance tier. The nearest rivals list for each chip confirms how tightly grouped this segment is: the E-2224 is 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core i5-5675C, 0.2% behind the AMD Ryzen 5 2400GE, and 0.4% ahead of the Intel Core i7-4790T. The E3-1241 v3 sits 0.2% behind the i5-5675C and 0.4% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 3200GE.

What is striking here is how close these two generations actually are in raw compute. The E-2224 has a 0.70 GHz higher boost clock (4.60 GHz versus 3.90 GHz) and a 0.10 GHz lower base clock (3.40 GHz versus 3.50 GHz). That higher boost ceiling should theoretically give the newer chip a clear single-thread advantage, yet the R15 single-core test shows zero difference. The newer architecture helps in the more modern R20 and R23 workloads, but only by fractions of a percent. In practical terms, these two processors are interchangeable in Cinebench-style rendering workloads. The E-2224 wins all six head-to-head tests, but the biggest win is 0.6%, a margin that would be lost in run-to-run noise.

The Verdict

From the data, the Intel Xeon E-2224 is the faster processor in every benchmark where a winner is declared. It wins all six head-to-head tests, with a maximum delta of 0.6% in Cinebench R20 single-core. Its average benchmark score of 1762 is higher than the E3-1241 v3's 1756, and it holds a 0.3% advantage in the direct comparison. For anyone building a system today and choosing strictly on measured performance, the E-2224 is the pick.

However, the scale of that victory matters. A 0.3% to 0.6% lead is not something you will feel in real workloads. Both CPUs sit at the 41st percentile of all processors, and both are end-of-life products. The E3-1241 v3 is not a bad choice if it is already in hand or available at a steep discount, the data shows it trades blows with the E-2224 within a very tight band. The newer chip's higher boost clock (4.60 GHz versus 3.90 GHz) gives it a theoretical edge, but the benchmark results show that edge is mostly unrealized in Cinebench.

The deciding factors, then, are not raw performance but platform-level differences. The E-2224 uses DDR4 memory with 42.7 GB/s of bandwidth, while the E3-1241 v3 is limited to DDR3 at 25.6 GB/s. That 17.1 GB/s difference in memory bandwidth is the largest gap between these two chips in any measured specification. If your workloads are memory-sensitive, the E-2224 has a clear structural advantage even if Cinebench scores do not show it. The E-2224 also includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics P630), while the E3-1241 v3 has none, useful for troubleshooting or headless server setups where a discrete GPU is not always present.

Architecture Differences

These two CPUs come from different Intel generations and different process nodes. The E-2224 is built on Coffee Lake-S WS, a 14 nm design with a die size of 126 mm². The E3-1241 v3 uses Haswell-WS on a 22 nm process, with a larger 160 mm² die and 1,400 million transistors. The transistor count for the E-2224 is not listed in the data, but the die size difference suggests a denser design on the newer part.

Both processors have 4 physical cores and 8 MB of shared L3 cache, with 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core. The key architectural difference is threading: the E-2224 has 4 threads total (one per core), while the E3-1241 v3 has 8 threads (two per core). This is a significant divergence in design philosophy. The E3-1241 v3 can process two threads per core, which typically helps in heavily threaded workloads that can use more than 4 threads. The E-2224 sacrifices that capability for higher clock speeds and a newer architecture.

The sockets differ as well. The E-2224 fits Intel Socket 1151, while the E3-1241 v3 uses Intel Socket 1150. These are not interchangeable, so the motherboard choice locks you into one platform. Both chips support PCIe Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes, and both support ECC memory, a key feature for server and workstation reliability. The integrated graphics situation also differs: the E-2224 has UHD Graphics P630, the E3-1241 v3 has no integrated graphics at all.

Memory architecture is another major split. The E-2224 supports DDR4 in dual-channel configuration, while the E3-1241 v3 supports DDR3 in dual-channel. The measured memory bandwidth reflects this: 42.7 GB/s for the E-2224 versus 25.6 GB/s for the E3-1241 v3. That is a 66.8% advantage for the newer chip in theoretical memory throughput.

Specification Differences

The specification sheet shows several fields where these two parts diverge. The E-2224 has 4 threads, the E3-1241 v3 has 8 threads. Base clocks are close: 3.40 GHz for the E-2224 versus 3.50 GHz for the E3-1241 v3. Boost clocks differ more substantially: 4.60 GHz versus 3.90 GHz. TDP is lower on the newer chip at 71 watts versus 80 watts for the older part.

Process node, foundry, and die size all differ: 14 nm versus 22 nm, with die sizes of 126 mm² and 160 mm² respectively. Transistor count is only listed for the E3-1241 v3 at 1,400 million. Memory support differs by generation: DDR4 versus DDR3, with bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s versus 25.6 GB/s. The E-2224 includes UHD Graphics P630; the E3-1241 v3 has no integrated graphics. Release dates are also far apart: the E-2224 launched on 2019-05-28, the E3-1241 v3 on 2014-05-10. Launch MSRP values are $193 for the E-2224 and $273 for the E3-1241 v3.

Both chips share several specs: 4 cores, 8 MB shared L3 cache, 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core, dual-channel memory bus, ECC support, PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes, server/workstation market segment, end-of-life production status, and locked multipliers.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2224 wins all three multi-core Cinebench tests, but by narrow margins: 0.3% in R15 (614 vs 612), 0.4% in R20 (2559 vs 2550), and 0.3% in R23 (6093 vs 6072).

Q: How much of a single-core advantage does the E-2224 have?

A: In Cinebench R15 single-core, the scores are identical at 86 points each. In R20, the E-2224 leads by 0.6% (361 vs 359), and in R23 it leads by 0.4% (860 vs 857).

Q: Does the E3-1241 v3's extra threads make it better for threaded workloads?

A: Despite having 8 threads versus 4, the E3-1241 v3 loses every multi-core benchmark to the E-2224. The newer architecture and higher boost clock of the E-2224 compensate for the thread deficit.

Q: What is the biggest measurable difference between these two chips?

A: Memory bandwidth. The E-2224 supports DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s, while the E3-1241 v3 supports DDR3 with 25.6 GB/s, a difference of 17.1 GB/s.

Q: Can I use the same motherboard for both processors?

A: No. The E-2224 uses Intel Socket 1151, while the E3-1241 v3 uses Intel Socket 1150. They require different motherboards.

Q: Which CPU has integrated graphics?

A: Only the E-2224 has integrated graphics (UHD Graphics P630). The E3-1241 v3 has no integrated graphics, so a discrete GPU is required for display output.

Where Each One Wins

The E-2224 wins every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, so the case for the older part rests entirely on platform fit and specific workload characteristics. The E3-1241 v3's 8 threads give it a structural advantage in software that scales well beyond 4 threads, even if Cinebench does not show it winning. For legacy applications or environments already built around DDR3 memory and Socket 1150 motherboards, the E3-1241 v3 remains a functional choice, the data shows it performs within 0.6% of the E-2224 in all tested scenarios.

The E-2224 is the clear winner for new builds. Its DDR4 memory support doubles the theoretical bandwidth (42.7 GB/s versus 25.6 GB/s), which matters for memory-bound tasks like database work, virtualization, or large data sets. The integrated UHD Graphics P630 is a practical advantage for server deployments where a discrete GPU is unnecessary or where you want a fallback for diagnostics. The lower TDP of 71 watts versus 80 watts also makes it easier to cool in compact workstation chassis.

For single-threaded performance, the E-2224 wins in R20 and R23, but the R15 tie suggests the gap is not consistent across all workloads. The higher 4.60 GHz boost clock gives the E-2224 headroom that the 3.90 GHz E3-1241 v3 simply cannot match. If you are running lightly threaded applications that respond to clock speed, the E-2224 is the safer bet.

In summary, the E-2224 is the better processor in every measured test, but the margins are so small that the decision should be driven by platform needs. Need DDR4 and modern socket compatibility? E-2224. Already invested in DDR3 and Socket 1150? The E3-1241 v3 will not embarrass you, it is within 0.6% in all benchmarks and offers double the threads. The data does not support a dramatic verdict either way; it supports a practical one.