Key Differences
In short — Core i3-4160T outperforms Xeon W3520 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i3-4160T is 1939 days newer than Xeon W3520.
Advantages of Intel Xeon W3520
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i3-4160T - 8 vs 4 threads
Advantages of Intel Core i3-4160T
- Performs up to 8% better in Alan Wake 2 than Xeon W3520 - 106 vs 98 FPS
- Consumes up to 73% less energy than Intel Xeon W3520 - 35 vs 130 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon W3520 doesn't have integrated graphics
Alan Wake 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Server/Workstation • Mar 30th, 2009
Desktop • Jul 21st, 2014
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon W3520 | vs | Intel Core i3-4160T |
---|---|---|
Mar 30th, 2009 | Release Date | Jul 21st, 2014 |
Xeon | Collection | Core i3 |
Bloomfield | Codename | Haswell |
Intel Socket 1366 | Socket | Intel Socket 1150 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 2 |
8 | Threads | 4 |
2.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.1 GHz |
2.9 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
130 W | TDP | 35 W |
45 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
20.0x | Multiplier | 31.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 4400 |
No | Overclockable | No |