| | | | | | |

Xeon E3-1220 v3 vs Core i5-10400F


Description
The E3-1220 v3 is based on Haswell architecture while the i5-10400F is based on Comet Lake.

Using the multithread performance as a reference, the E3-1220 v3 gets a score of 140.8 k points while the i5-10400F gets 370 k points.

Summarizing, the i5-10400F is 2.6 times faster than the E3-1220 v3 . To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.

Specs
CPUID
306c3
a0653
Core
Haswell-WS
Comet Lake-S
Architecture
Base frecuency
3.1 GHz
2.9 GHz
Boost frecuency
3.5 GHz
4.3 GHz
Socket
LGA 1150
LGA 1200
Cores/Threads
4 /4
6/12
TDP
80 W
65 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
64 kB
6x32+6x32 kB
Cache L2
256 kB
6x256 kB
Cache L3
8192 kB
12288 kB
Date
June 2013
April 2020
Mean monothread perf.
39.16k points
68.14k points
Mean multithread perf.
140.76k points
369.97k points

Non-optimized benchmark
The benchmark in Mode 0 (FPU) measures cpu performance with non-optimized software. It uses the basic µinstructions from the i386 architecture with the i387 floating point unit. This mode is compatible with all CPUs so it's practical to compare very different CPUs
Monothread
E3-1220 v3
i5-10400F
Test#1 (Integers)
3.45k
4.3k (x1.25)
Test#2 (FP)
9.96k
16.56k (x1.66)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
4.26k
5.25k (x1.23)
Test#1 (Memory)
4.27k
12.61k (x2.95)
TOTAL
21.94k
38.72k (x1.77)

Multithread

E3-1220 v3

i5-10400F
Test#1 (Integers)
14.01k
18.1k (x1.29)
Test#2 (FP)
37.68k
79.16k (x2.1)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
17.05k
26.75k (x1.57)
Test#1 (Memory)
7.35k
13.81k (x1.88)
TOTAL
76.09k
137.82k (x1.81)

AVX2 optimized benchmark
The benchmark in mode III (AVX2), like AVX1, is optimized to used 256 bits registers beside the second version of the Advanced Vector Extensions (AVX). The first AVX2 compatible CPU was released in 2013.
Monothread
E3-1220 v3
i5-10400F
Test#1 (Integers)
19.17k
26.28k (x1.37)
Test#2 (FP)
10.55k
23.38k (x2.22)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
4.79k
5.52k (x1.15)
Test#1 (Memory)
4.65k
12.96k (x2.79)
TOTAL
39.16k
68.14k (x1.74)

Multithread

E3-1220 v3

i5-10400F
Test#1 (Integers)
73.13k
163.67k (x2.24)
Test#2 (FP)
42.06k
159.74k (x3.8)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
18.03k
39k (x2.16)
Test#1 (Memory)
7.54k
7.56k (x1)
TOTAL
140.76k
369.97k (x2.63)

Performance/W
E3-1220 v3
i5-10400F
Test#1 (Integers)
914 points/W
2518 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
526 points/W
2457 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
225 points/W
600 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
94 points/W
116 points/W
TOTAL
1759 points/W
5692 points/W

Performance/GHz
E3-1220 v3
i5-10400F
Test#1 (Integers)
5478 points/GHz
6112 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
3014 points/GHz
5438 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1368 points/GHz
1283 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
1328 points/GHz
3014 points/GHz
TOTAL
11188 points/GHz
15847 points/GHz

Monothread performance graph
Monothread performance graphics gives the performance vs time. They are useful to measure the time it takes to the CPU to reach the maximum performance.

Usually, CPU's performance will be steady during these tests but if it has a slow frequency strategy, the first samples will show a lower score.


Test#1 (Integers) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#2 (FP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#3 (Generic, ZIP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#1 (Memory) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com

Multithread performance graph
Multithread graphs measure the performance against a heavy load during certain time.

If CPU's TDP doesn't limit the frequency and the machine is properly cooled, performance should remain steady vs time. Otherwise, the performance score will oscillate or decrease over time.


Test#1 (Integers) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#2 (FP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#3 (Generic, ZIP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#1 (Memory) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com

Hardlimit Benchmark Central - Ver. 3.11.4