i5-1035G1 vs Xeon E3-1230 v3
Aggregate performance score
Core i5-1035G1 outperforms Xeon E3-1230 v3 by a small 8% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Xeon E3-1230 v3 and Core i5-1035G1 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1358 | 1282 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 85 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.93 | no data |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Series | Xeon (Desktop) | Intel Core i5 |
| Power efficiency | 5.07 | 17.56 |
| Architecture codename | Haswell-WS (2013−2014) | Ice Lake (Client) (2019) |
| Release date | 2 June 2013 (11 years ago) | 1 August 2019 (5 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $240 | $297 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Xeon E3-1230 v3 and Core i5-1035G1 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | 3.3 GHz | 1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.7 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | OPI |
| Bus rate | 5 GT/s | 4 × 4 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 10 |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 256K (per core) | 256K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 8 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 10 nm |
| Die size | 160 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 72 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1,400 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon E3-1230 v3 and Core i5-1035G1 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | FCLGA1150 | FCBGA1526 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 80 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E3-1230 v3 and Core i5-1035G1. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | - | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | + |
| TSX | + | - |
| Idle States | + | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | + |
| Flex Memory Access | + | no data |
| SIPP | + | - |
| Fast Memory Access | + | no data |
| Deep Learning Boost | - | + |
Security technologies
Xeon E3-1230 v3 and Core i5-1035G1 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | - |
| EDB | + | + |
| Secure Key | + | + |
| Identity Protection | + | - |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® ME |
| OS Guard | + | + |
| Anti-Theft | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E3-1230 v3 and Core i5-1035G1 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | + | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E3-1230 v3 and Core i5-1035G1. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | 32 GB | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 59.732 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel® UHD Graphics for 10th Gen Intel® Processors |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 1.05 GHz |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Xeon E3-1230 v3 and Core i5-1035G1 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
| eDP | no data | + |
| DisplayPort | - | + |
| HDMI | - | + |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Xeon E3-1230 v3 and Core i5-1035G1 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | no data | 4096 x 2304@60Hz |
| Max resolution over eDP | no data | 5120 x 3200@60Hz |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | no data | 5120 x 3200@60Hz |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Xeon E3-1230 v3 and Core i5-1035G1 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | 12 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E3-1230 v3 and Core i5-1035G1.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | no data |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.
Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core
Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.
Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.
Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.
Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.
Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core
Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.
Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core
Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 4.29 | 4.64 |
| Recency | 2 June 2013 | 1 August 2019 |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 80 Watt | 15 Watt |
i5-1035G1 has a 8.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 120% more advanced lithography process, and 433.3% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Xeon E3-1230 v3 and Core i5-1035G1.
Be aware that Xeon E3-1230 v3 is a server/workstation processor while Core i5-1035G1 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E3-1230 v3 and Core i5-1035G1, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
