N200 vs Xeon E3-1230
Aggregate performance score
Xeon E3-1230 outperforms N200 by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Xeon E3-1230 and N200 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1594 | 1599 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.98 | no data |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Power efficiency | 3.82 | 50.63 |
| Architecture codename | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) | no data |
| Release date | 3 April 2011 (13 years ago) | 1 January 2023 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $428 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Xeon E3-1230 and N200 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | no data |
| Threads | 8 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 3.2 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 3.6 GHz | 3.7 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | no data |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | no data |
| L3 cache | 8 MB (shared) | 6 MB Intel® Smart Cache |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | Intel 7 nm |
| Die size | 216 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 69 °C | 105 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1,160 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon E3-1230 and N200 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 | 1 |
| Socket | LGA1155 | FCBGA1264 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 80 Watt | 6 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E3-1230 and N200. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 2.0 | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | - |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | + |
| Flex Memory Access | + | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | + | no data |
| GPIO | no data | + |
| FDI | - | no data |
| Fast Memory Access | + | no data |
Security technologies
Xeon E3-1230 and N200 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
| Identity Protection | + | - |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E3-1230 and N200 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E3-1230 and N200. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR4-3200, DDR5-4800, LPDDR5-4800 |
| Maximum memory size | 32 GB | 16 GB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 1 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 21 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel UHD Graphics |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 750 MHz |
| Execution Units | no data | 32 |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Xeon E3-1230 and N200 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Xeon E3-1230 and N200 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| 4K resolution support | no data | + |
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | no data | 4096 x 2160@60Hz |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | no data | 4096 x 2160@60Hz |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Xeon E3-1230 and N200 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | 12.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E3-1230 and N200.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 20 | 9 |
| USB revision | no data | 2.0/3.2 |
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 | 3.23 | 3.21 |
| Recency | 3 April 2011 | 1 January 2023 |
| Threads | 8 | 4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 80 Watt | 6 Watt |
Xeon E3-1230 has a 0.6% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more threads.
N200, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 11 years, and 1233.3% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Xeon E3-1230 and N200.
Be aware that Xeon E3-1230 is a server/workstation processor while N200 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E3-1230 and N200, 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.
