Key Differences
In short — Core i3-4160T outperforms Xeon E3-1240 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i3-4160T is 1205 days newer than Xeon E3-1240.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E3-1240
- 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 5% better in Dying Light 2: Stay Human than Xeon E3-1240 - 123 vs 117 FPS
- Consumes up to 56% less energy than Intel Xeon E3-1240 - 35 vs 80 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E3-1240 doesn't have integrated graphics
Dying Light 2: Stay Human
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Server/Workstation • Apr 3rd, 2011
Desktop • Jul 21st, 2014
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E3-1240 | vs | Intel Core i3-4160T |
---|---|---|
Apr 3rd, 2011 | Release Date | Jul 21st, 2014 |
Xeon E3 | Collection | Core i3 |
Sandy Bridge | Codename | Haswell |
Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | Intel Socket 1150 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 2 |
8 | Threads | 4 |
3.3 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.1 GHz |
3.7 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
80 W | TDP | 35 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
33.0x | Multiplier | 31.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 4400 |
No | Overclockable | No |