CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of E3-1230 v3 vs 4770K among all CPUs

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more

Integrated Graphics

Integrated GPU performance for graphics

Sky Diver and Cloud Gate

Integrated Graphics (OpenCL)

Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing

CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more

Performance per Watt

How efficiently does the processor use electricity?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

8.8

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Xeon E3-1230 v3 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Xeon E3-1230 v3  based on its power consumption.

See full details

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Xeon E3-1230 v3

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon E3-1230 v3

Report a correction
Much better performance per dollar 10.51 pt/$ vs 3.83 pt/$ Around 2.8x better performance per dollar
Much better performance per watt 32.83 pt/W vs 11.31 pt/W Around 3x better performance per watt
Supports trusted computing Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing
Front view of Intel Core i7 4770K

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i7 4770K

Report a correction
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Higher clock speed 3.5 GHz vs 3.3 GHz More than 5% higher clock speed
Slightly higher turbo clock speed 3.9 GHz vs 3.7 GHz More than 5% higher turbo clock speed
Better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score 14,184 vs 12,673 More than 10% better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score
Better geekbench 3 single core score 3,689 vs 3,362 Around 10% better geekbench 3 single core score
Newer Jun, 2013 vs Apr, 2013 Release date 2 months later

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E3-1230 v3 vs Core i7 4770K

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E3-1230 v3
4,300,000 MB/s
Core i7 4770K
4,810,000 MB/s

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon E3-1230 v3  vs
Core i7 4770K 
Clock speed 3.3 GHz 3.5 GHz
Turbo clock speed 3.7 GHz 3.9 GHz
Cores Quad core Quad core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing Yes No
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
F16C
MMX
SSE4
AVX
SSE3
EM64T
SSE
SSE4.1
FMA3
SSE4.2
Supplemental SSE3
AES
AVX 2.0
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 80W 84W
Annual home energy cost 19.27 $/year 20.24 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 70.08 $/year 73.58 $/year
Performance per watt 32.83 pt/W 11.31 pt/W
Typical power consumption 65W 68.25W

bus

Architecture DMI DMI 2.0
Number of links 0 0
Transfer rate 5,000 MT/s 5,000 MT/s

details

Xeon E3-1230 v3  vs
Core i7 4770K 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 8 8
L3 cache 8 MB 8 MB
L3 cache per core 2 MB/core 2 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nm 22 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclock popularity 0 205

integrated graphics

GPU None GPU
Label N/A Intel® HD Graphics 4600
Number of displays supported N/A 3
GPU clock speed N/A 350 MHz
Turbo clock speed N/A 1,250 MHz

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1600
DDR3L-1600
DDR3-1333
DDR3
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC Yes No
Maximum bandwidth 25,600 MB/s 25,600 MB/s
Maximum memory size 32,768 MB 32,768 MB
Intel Xeon E3-1230 v3
Report a correction
Intel Core i7 4770K
Report a correction

Comments

Showing 16 comments.
You are so funny. It seems that you have not install a patch zZzZz
Again these are synthetic benchmarks. How does this translate to real world performance? You are missing the point. If you put these two system side by side and use them in real world every tasks you will never know the difference. Furthermore watch dogs and crysis 3 are the worst examples you can use because anyone that knows anything about those games will tell you how poorly optimized they are. Watch dogs is a joke in the PC gaming world and the fact you even throw that out there like its relevant is a joke in itself.
here's my test. "I have yet to even see any game use 50% of it." you can try watch dogs/crysis 3 i dont want to waste my time to persuade you. if you insist the performance is enough, take you x1230 v3 and keep calm. the obvious evidence is using multi video cards, there are bottleneck undoubtedly. try the latest cards if you have money, maybe you will change your mind. http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2206816 http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/3214259 my post in last year. http://www.hkepc.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=2088734&extra=page%3D1
Who gives a crap about unlocking clock speeds besides synthetic benchmark geeks. Even if you clock a 4770K to 4.5GHz the performance increase isn't worth the power draw and definitely not worth the return on real word performance. I have my 1230V3 hard locked to 3.7GHz per core and I have yet to even see any game use 50% of it. So again tell me why do you feel that overclocking is crucial? I have another rig with a 2600K running stock speeds. People, seriously you don't need to overclock Sandy Bridge or newer. You many want to but the performance increase isn't worth it.
You can't unlock your clock speed, dude
I mentioned that if you "over-clocking" Can you see??? And I was using HD7970 CFX
BS! In game you will see no difference and if there is it will be 1fps to 3fps at most.
This information is incorrect. I have the E3-1230V3 and at at stock speeds it sits between the 3770K and 4770K which are already almost identical in performance. Also I have it paired with a Corsair H80 with a single fan at the lowest setting possible and it idles in the 30's and spikes into the 50's when gaming or running tasks.
Yes...i7 4770k's clock speed faster than e3 1230v3 too in game, i think i7 4770k can provide you more stable fraps. therefore i suggest you buy 4770k btw, 4790k has launched, why dont you choose that processor PS: sorry for long time reply( i'm not visit this website frequently)
I'm thinking i should wait for the broadwell processors.
So, i7 4770k is better than that Xeon, provided we cool it properly, right?
i was using e3 1230 v3 and now i changed to 4770k i was using intel stock cooler, but now i am using water cooling system i will recommend you use xeon if you havent too much money to build up nice cooling system if you have enough money, 4770k must be better... there are onboard graphic(hd4600) and support quick sync the TDP of 4770k is a monster... dont expect using air cooler to overclock, you must regret!
Hey @disqus_dxZXhQB9Z4:disqus can you please tell me what cabinet and colling system are you using, actually planing to build the same build with i7-4770k or Xeon 1230 + MSI NGTX 770 TF 4G/OC.
This CPU is what dreams are made of. Performs Likes a 4770k, 100$ cheaper, and if you get the right mobo, you can still lock it to its turbo speed. I dont think ill ever see this thing hit 100% usage, except on prime95 of course. I'v been playing arma 3 on it in ultra settings and streaming at 1080p, and i still get over 40 FPS no issues. I would get 60, but you know i only have a lil 760 GPU. Seriously, this is what you want, you just dont know it yet.
Do we really even use Integrated graphics though for builds like this? Performs just the same as an i7 would with an MSI Twin Frozr GTX 770 installed. I'm planning on getting the E3 1230 almost definitely.
Take a look at that! Same exact thing, however, the E3 doesn't have integrated graphics. The E3 also sports a cheaper price tag! So if you aren't planning to overclock, I'd hit up an E3 1230 V3 instead of a 4770k.
comments powered by Disqus