Xeon E-2478 vs i3-2348M
Aggregate performance score
Xeon E-2478 outperforms Core i3-2348M by a whopping 2248% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core i3-2348M and Xeon E-2478 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2601 | 313 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 82.67 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | Intel Core i3 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 2.16 | 22.22 |
| Architecture codename | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) | Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) |
| Release date | 1 January 2013 (11 years ago) | 14 December 2023 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $225 | $568 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Core i3-2348M and Xeon E-2478 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 cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 16 |
| Base clock speed | 2.3 GHz | 2.8 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.3 GHz | 5.2 GHz |
| Bus type | DMI 2.0 | no data |
| Bus rate | 4 × 5 GT/s | 16 GT/s |
| Multiplier | 23 | no data |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | 2 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 3 MB | 24 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | Intel 7 nm |
| Die size | 149 mm2 | 257 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 85C (PGA); 100C (BGA) | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 624 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Core i3-2348M and Xeon E-2478 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 configuration | 1 (Uniprocessor) | 1 |
| Socket | PPGA988 | FCLGA1700 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 80 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i3-2348M and Xeon E-2478. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® AVX | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| My WiFi | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | 2 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | + |
| Idle States | + | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | + |
| Flex Memory Access | + | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | + |
| FDI | + | no data |
| Fast Memory Access | + | no data |
Security technologies
Core i3-2348M and Xeon E-2478 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | + |
| EDB | + | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| Identity Protection | + | - |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
| Anti-Theft | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i3-2348M and Xeon E-2478 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | - | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i3-2348M and Xeon E-2478. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR5-4800 |
| Maximum memory size | 16 GB | 128 GB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 21.335 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel HD Graphics 3000 | N/A |
| Quick Sync Video | + | - |
| Clear Video HD | + | no data |
| Graphics max frequency | 1.15 GHz | no data |
| InTru 3D | + | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Core i3-2348M and Xeon E-2478 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 2 | no data |
| eDP | + | no data |
| DisplayPort | + | - |
| HDMI | + | - |
| SDVO | + | no data |
| CRT | + | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i3-2348M and Xeon E-2478.
| PCIe version | 2 | 5 |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 16 |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.80 | 18.78 |
| Recency | 1 January 2013 | 14 December 2023 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 8 |
| Threads | 4 | 16 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 80 Watt |
i3-2348M has 128.6% lower power consumption.
Xeon E-2478, on the other hand, has a 2247.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, and 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads.
The Xeon E-2478 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i3-2348M in performance tests.
Be aware that Core i3-2348M is a notebook processor while Xeon E-2478 is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i3-2348M and Xeon E-2478, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
