Apple M1 vs Xeon E3-1240

Aggregate performance score

Xeon E3-1240
2011
4 cores / 8 threads, 80 Watt
3.40
Apple M1
2020
8 cores / 8 threads
5.17
+52.1%

Apple M1 outperforms Xeon E3-1240 by an impressive 52% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E3-1240 and Apple M1 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking15531192
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.04no data
Market segmentServerLaptop
Seriesno dataApple Apple M-Series
Power efficiency4.02no data
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge (2011−2013)no data
Release date3 April 2011 (13 years ago)10 November 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$209no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon E3-1240 and Apple M1 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads88
Base clock speed3.3 GHz2.064 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz3.2 GHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)2 MB
L2 cache256 KB (per core)16 MB
L3 cache8 MB (shared)16 MB
Chip lithography32 nm5 nm
Die size216 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature69 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,160 million16000 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E3-1240 and Apple M1 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 configuration1no data
SocketLGA1155no data
Power consumption (TDP)80 Wattno data

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E3-1240 and Apple M1. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVXno data
AES-NI+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
Demand Based Switching+no data
FDI-no data
Fast Memory Access+no data

Security technologies

Xeon E3-1240 and Apple M1 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data
Identity Protection+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E3-1240 and Apple M1 are enumerated here.

VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E3-1240 and Apple M1. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3no data
Maximum memory size32 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth21 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataApple M1 8-Core GPU

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E3-1240 and Apple M1.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes20no data

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.

Xeon E3-1240 3.40
Apple M1 5.17
+52.1%

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.

Xeon E3-1240 5403
Apple M1 8207
+51.9%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.40 5.17
Recency 3 April 2011 10 November 2020
Physical cores 4 8
Chip lithography 32 nm 5 nm

Apple M1 has a 52.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, 100% more physical cores, and a 540% more advanced lithography process.

The Apple M1 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E3-1240 in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon E3-1240 is a server/workstation processor while Apple M1 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E3-1240 and Apple M1, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Xeon E3-1240
Xeon E3-1240
Apple M1
M1

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


4.3 171 vote

Rate Xeon E3-1240 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 2236 votes

Rate Apple M1 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon E3-1240 or Apple M1, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.