Winner
Intel Core i3 2100
CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core i3 2100 based on its performance, single-core performance, power consumption and value.
See full details Intel Xeon X3220 vs Core i3 2100 |
Released January, 2007
Intel Xeon X3220
- 2.4 GHz
- Quad core
5 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Intel Xeon X3220
 | Much more l2 cache 8 MB | | Much more l2 cache per core 2 MB/core |
| | Lower typical power consumption 85.31W | | More cores 4 |
VS
Released January, 2011
Intel Core i3 2100
- 3.1 GHz
- Dual core
8.2 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Core i3 2100
| | Much newer manufacturing process 32 nm | | Higher clock speed 3.1 GHz |
| | Has a built-in GPU Yes | | Much better performance per dollar 1.14 pt/$ |
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of X3220 vs 2100 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 | |
| 8.2 | CPUBoss Score |
Combination of all six facets | |
 | Winner |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Much more l2 cache | 8 MB | vs | 0.5 MB | 16x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Much more l2 cache per core | 2 MB/core | vs | 0.25 MB/core | 8x more l2 cache per core | |||
| Lower typical power consumption | 85.31W | vs | 98.28W | Around 15% lower typical power consumption | |||
| More cores | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many cores; run more applications at once | |||
| Much lower annual home energy cost | 25.29 $/year | vs | 37.88 $/year | Around 35% lower annual home energy cost | |||
| Better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.52 GHz | vs | 3.23 GHz | Around 10% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
| Better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 3.67 GHz | vs | 3.23 GHz | Around 15% better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
| |||||||
| Much newer manufacturing process | 32 nm | vs | 65 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
| Higher clock speed | 3.1 GHz | vs | 2.4 GHz | Around 30% higher clock speed | |||
| Has a built-in GPU | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required | |||
| Much better performance per dollar | 1.14 pt/$ | vs | 0.63 pt/$ | More than 80% better performance per dollar | |||
| Significantly better PassMark (Single core) score | 1,583 | vs | 939 | Around 70% better PassMark (Single core) score | |||
| Newer | Jan, 2011 | vs | Jan, 2007 | Release date over 4 years later | |||
| Higher Maximum operating temperature | 69.1 °C | vs | 62.2 °C | More than 10% higher Maximum operating temperature | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon X3220 vs Core i3 2100
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
GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
PassMark (Single Core)
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Xeon X3220 | vs | Core i3 2100 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 3.1 GHz | |
| Cores | Quad core | Dual core | |
| Socket type | |||
| LGA 775 | |||
| LGA 1155 | |||
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Supports trusted computing | No | No | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE4 | |||
| AVX | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE | |||
| SSE4.1 | |||
| SSE4.2 | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 105W | 65W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 25.29 $/year | 37.88 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 91.98 $/year | 93.47 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 1.21 pt/W | 1.41 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 85.31W | 98.28W | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | FSB | DMI | |
| Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
details | Xeon X3220 | vs | Core i3 2100 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 4 | 4 | |
| L2 cache | 8 MB | 0.5 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 2 MB/core | 0.25 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 65 nm | 32 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
| Clock multiplier | 9 | 31 | |
| Operating temperature | Unknown - 62.2°C | Unknown - 69.1°C | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclocked clock speed | 3.52 GHz | 3.23 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 3.67 GHz | 3.23 GHz | |
| PassMark (Overclocked) | 2,185.2 | 1,518.9 | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.52 GHz | 3.23 GHz | |
integrated graphics | |||
| GPU | None | GPU | |
| Label | N/A | Intel® HD Graphics 2000 | |
| Number of displays supported | N/A | 2 | |
| GPU clock speed | N/A | 850 MHz | |
| Turbo clock speed | N/A | 1,100 MHz | |
memory controller | |||
| Memory controller | Built-in | Built-in | |
 Intel Xeon X3220  Report a correction |  Intel Core i3 2100 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $150 | ||
| 2100 vs 1200 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $150 | $205 | |
| 2100 vs 2400 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $150 | ||
| 2100 vs Q6600 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $150 | $76 | |
| 2100 vs G2030 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $150 | $125 | |
| 2100 vs 3220 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $150 | $179 | |
| 2100 vs E8400 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $150 | $75 | |
| 2100 vs G2020 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $305 | $300 | |
| W3520 vs 2500 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $272 | $350 | |
| 4790K vs 6700K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 4200U vs 6410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $134 | $225 | |
| 847 vs 3217U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 6200U vs 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $275 | $161 | |
| 4005U vs N3540 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $180 | ||
| 3470 vs 5200 | ||
