i3-13100F vs Xeon E5-2643 v3

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon E5-2643 v3
2014
6 cores / 12 threads, 135 Watt
6.58
Core i3-13100F
2023
4 cores / 8 threads, 58 Watt
9.21
+40%

Core i3-13100F outperforms Xeon E5-2643 v3 by a considerable 40% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E5-2643 v3 and Core i3-13100F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1047835
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data53.81
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
Power efficiency4.6115.03
Architecture codenameHaswell-EP (2014−2015)Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)
Release date8 September 2014 (10 years ago)4 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$109

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon E5-2643 v3 and Core i3-13100F 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 cores6 (Hexa-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads128
Base clock speed3.4 GHz3.4 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz4.5 GHz
Bus rate9.6 GT/sno data
L1 cache64K (per core)80K (per core)
L2 cache256K (per core)1.25 MB (per core)
L3 cache20 MB (shared)12 MB (shared)
Chip lithography22 nmIntel 7 nm
Die size356 mm2257 mm2
Maximum core temperature77 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data72 °C
Number of transistors2,600 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E5-2643 v3 and Core i3-13100F 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 configuration21
SocketFCLGA2011FCLGA1700
Power consumption (TDP)135 Watt58 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-2643 v3 and Core i3-13100F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVX2Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technology2.02.0
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX-+
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Flex Memory Access-no data
Demand Based Switching+no data
PAE46 Bitno data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data-
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Xeon E5-2643 v3 and Core i3-13100F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB++
Secure Key++
OS Guard++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-2643 v3 and Core i3-13100F are enumerated here.

VT-d++
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-2643 v3 and Core i3-13100F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200
Maximum memory size768 GB192 GB
Max memory channels42
Maximum memory bandwidth68 GB/s76.8 GB/s
ECC memory support+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-2643 v3 and Core i3-13100F.

PCIe version3.05.0 and 4.0
PCI Express lanes4020

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.

Xeon E5-2643 v3 6.58
i3-13100F 9.21
+40%

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.

Xeon E5-2643 v3 10446
i3-13100F 14636
+40.1%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.58 9.21
Recency 8 September 2014 4 January 2023
Physical cores 6 4
Threads 12 8
Power consumption (TDP) 135 Watt 58 Watt

Xeon E5-2643 v3 has 50% more physical cores and 50% more threads.

i3-13100F, on the other hand, has a 40% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and 132.8% lower power consumption.

The Core i3-13100F is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E5-2643 v3 in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon E5-2643 v3 is a server/workstation processor while Core i3-13100F is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-2643 v3 and Core i3-13100F, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Xeon E5-2643 v3
Xeon E5-2643 v3
Intel Core i3-13100F
Core i3-13100F

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.6 161 vote

Rate Xeon E5-2643 v3 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 861 vote

Rate Core i3-13100F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon E5-2643 v3 or Core i3-13100F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.