i3-13100F vs Xeon Gold 6226

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon Gold 6226
2019
12 cores / 24 threads, 125 Watt
13.11
+39.8%
Core i3-13100F
2023
4 cores / 8 threads, 58 Watt
9.38

Xeon Gold 6226 outperforms Core i3-13100F by a considerable 40% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon Gold 6226 and Core i3-13100F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking589828
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation9.7750.52
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Xeon Goldno data
Power efficiency9.7415.02
Architecture codenameCascade Lake (2019−2020)Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)
Release date2 April 2019 (5 years ago)4 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,776$109

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

i3-13100F has 417% better value for money than Xeon Gold 6226.

Detailed specifications

Xeon Gold 6226 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 cores12 (Dodeca-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads248
Base clock speed2.7 GHz3.4 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz4.5 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier27no data
L1 cache768 KB80K (per core)
L2 cache12 MB1.25 MB (per core)
L3 cache19.25 MB12 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nmIntel 7 nm
Die sizeno data257 mm2
Maximum core temperature86 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data72 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++

Compatibility

Information on Xeon Gold 6226 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 configuration4 (Multiprocessor)1
SocketFCLGA3647FCLGA1700
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt58 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon Gold 6226 and Core i3-13100F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shift++
Turbo Boost Technology2.02.0
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX++
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0--
Deep Learning Boost++

Security technologies

Xeon Gold 6226 and Core i3-13100F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB++
Secure Keyno data+
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon Gold 6226 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 Gold 6226 and Core i3-13100F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2933DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200
Maximum memory size1 TB192 GB
Max memory channels62
Maximum memory bandwidth140.8 GB/s76.8 GB/s
ECC memory support+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon Gold 6226 and Core i3-13100F.

PCIe version3.05.0 and 4.0
PCI Express lanes4820

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 Gold 6226 13.11
+39.8%
i3-13100F 9.38

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 Gold 6226 20429
+39.7%
i3-13100F 14624

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 13.11 9.38
Recency 2 April 2019 4 January 2023
Physical cores 12 4
Threads 24 8
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 58 Watt

Xeon Gold 6226 has a 39.8% higher aggregate performance score, and 200% more physical cores and 200% more threads.

i3-13100F, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, and 115.5% lower power consumption.

The Xeon Gold 6226 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i3-13100F in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon Gold 6226 is a server/workstation processor while Core i3-13100F is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon Gold 6226 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 Gold 6226
Xeon Gold 6226
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.


3.4 5 votes

Rate Xeon Gold 6226 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 851 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 Gold 6226 or Core i3-13100F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.