3 100U vs Xeon E5-2663 V3
Aggregate performance score
Core 3 100U outperforms Xeon E5-2663 V3 by a significant 25% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Xeon E5-2663 V3 and Core 3 100U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 974 | 820 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Raptor Lake-U |
| Power efficiency | 6.68 | 58.61 |
| Architecture codename | Haswell-EP (2014−2015) | Raptor Lake-U Refresh (2024) |
| Release date | 8 September 2014 (10 years ago) | 8 January 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $426 |
Detailed specifications
Xeon E5-2663 V3 and Core 3 100U 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 | 10 (Deca-Core) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 20 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 1.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.5 GHz | 4.7 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 55 MHz |
| L1 cache | 64K (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 256K (per core) | 1.25 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 25 MB (shared) | 10 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | Intel 7 nm |
| Die size | 356 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 2,600 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon E5-2663 V3 and Core 3 100U 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 | 2 | 1 |
| Socket | 2011-3 | FCBGA1744 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 105 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-2663 V3 and Core 3 100U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | + |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| TSX | + | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Flex Memory Access | no data | + |
| Deep Learning Boost | - | + |
Security technologies
Xeon E5-2663 V3 and Core 3 100U technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-2663 V3 and Core 3 100U are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-2663 V3 and Core 3 100U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-2133 | DDR5-5200, DDR4-3200, LPDDR4x-4267 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 96 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel® Graphics |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 1.25 GHz |
| Execution Units | no data | 64 |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Xeon E5-2663 V3 and Core 3 100U integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 4 |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Xeon E5-2663 V3 and Core 3 100U integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | no data | 4096 x 2304 @ 60Hz |
| Max resolution over eDP | no data | 4096 x 2304 @ 120Hz |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | no data | 7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Xeon E5-2663 V3 and Core 3 100U 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 E5-2663 V3 and Core 3 100U.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 40 | 8 |
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 | 7.41 | 9.29 |
| Recency | 8 September 2014 | 8 January 2024 |
| Physical cores | 10 | 6 |
| Threads | 20 | 8 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 105 Watt | 15 Watt |
Xeon E5-2663 V3 has 66.7% more physical cores and 150% more threads.
3 100U, on the other hand, has a 25.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, and 600% lower power consumption.
The Core 3 100U is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E5-2663 V3 in performance tests.
Be aware that Xeon E5-2663 V3 is a server/workstation processor while Core 3 100U is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-2663 V3 and Core 3 100U, 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.
