i3-3240 vs Xeon X3380

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon X3380
2009
95 Watt
1.62
+10.2%
Core i3-3240
2012
2 cores / 4 threads, 55 Watt
1.47

Xeon X3380 outperforms Core i3-3240 by a moderate 10% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon X3380 and Core i3-3240 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking21012176
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data2.62
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
Power efficiency1.612.53
Architecture codenameno dataIvy Bridge (2012−2013)
Release date1 January 2009 (15 years ago)3 September 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$75

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon X3380 and Core i3-3240 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 coresno data2 (Dual-core)
Threadsno data4
Base clock speed3.16 GHz3.4 GHz
Boost clock speedno data3.4 GHz
Bus rateno data5 GT/s
L1 cacheno data64 KB (per core)
L2 cacheno data256 KB (per core)
L3 cache12 MB L2 Cache3 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nm22 nm
Die sizeno data94 mm2
Maximum core temperature71 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data65 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range0.85V-1.3625Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Xeon X3380 and Core i3-3240 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 configurationno data1
SocketLGA775FCLGA1155
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt55 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon X3380 and Core i3-3240. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
My WiFino data+
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology-+
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Demand Based Switching-no data
FDIno data+
FSB parity-no data

Security technologies

Xeon X3380 and Core i3-3240 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-+
EDB++
Secure Keyno data-
Identity Protection-+
Anti-Theftno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon X3380 and Core i3-3240 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data-
VT-x++
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon X3380 and Core i3-3240. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data32 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data25.6 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel HD Graphics 2500
Quick Sync Video-+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequencyno data1.05 GHz
InTru 3Dno data+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Xeon X3380 and Core i3-3240 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon X3380 and Core i3-3240.

PCIe versionno data2.0

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 X3380 1.62
+10.2%
i3-3240 1.47

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 X3380 2568
+10.3%
i3-3240 2329

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.62 1.47
Recency 1 January 2009 3 September 2012
Chip lithography 45 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 55 Watt

Xeon X3380 has a 10.2% higher aggregate performance score.

i3-3240, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 104.5% more advanced lithography process, and 72.7% lower power consumption.

The Xeon X3380 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i3-3240 in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon X3380 is a server/workstation processor while Core i3-3240 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon X3380 and Core i3-3240, 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 X3380
Xeon X3380
Intel Core i3-3240
Core i3-3240

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.


4.6 9 votes

Rate Xeon X3380 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 1238 votes

Rate Core i3-3240 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon X3380 or Core i3-3240, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.