Core i3-8130U vs Xeon E5-1603

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Core i3-8130U vs Xeon E5-1603 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core i3-8130U vs Xeon E5-1603: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core i3-8130U

2018

Why buy it

✅Draws 15W instead of 130W, a 115W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (12 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 620, while Xeon E5-1603 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (4 MB vs 10 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-1603, which brings 4 cores / 4 threads.

Xeon E5-1603

2012

Why buy it

✅+150% larger total L3 cache (10 MB vs 4 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 4 cores / 4 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,482 vs 3,521).
❌766.7% higher power demand at 130W vs 15W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i3-8130U can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-8130U better than Xeon E5-1603?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5-1603 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i3-8130U is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i3-8130U is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.8% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-8130U is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core i3-8130U still makes the most sense overall. Core i3-8130U comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core i3-8130U makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2018 vs 2012) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 4 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core i3-8130U vs Xeon E5-1603 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core i3-8130U

The Core i3-8130U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 13 February 2018 (7 years ago). It is based on the Kaby Lake Refresh (2017−2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1356. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 3,521 points. Launch price was $281.

Xeon E5-1603

The Xeon E5-1603 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency: 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 10 MB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 130 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-800, DDR3-1066. Passmark benchmark score: 3,482 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i3-8130U packs 2 cores / 4 threads, while the Xeon E5-1603 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Xeon E5-1603 has 2 more cores. The Core i3-8130U is built on the Kaby Lake Refresh (2017−2019) architecture. In PassMark, the Core i3-8130U scores 3,521 against the Xeon E5-1603's 3,482 — a 1.1% lead for the Core i3-8130U. L3 cache: 4 MB (total) on the Core i3-8130U vs 10 MB on the Xeon E5-1603.

Feature	Core i3-8130U	Xeon E5-1603
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	3.4 GHz	—
Base Clock	2.2 GHz	2.8 GHz+27%
L3 Cache	4 MB (total)	10 MB+150%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	—
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Kaby Lake Refresh (2017−2019)	—
PassMark	3,521+1%	3,482
Geekbench 6 Single	1,050	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-8130U uses the BGA1356 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E5-1603 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i3-8130U	Xeon E5-1603
Socket	BGA1356	LGA2011
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2400	—
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	12	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i3-8130U) / not specified (Xeon E5-1603). The Core i3-8130U includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 620), while the Xeon E5-1603 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-8130U targets Mainstream Laptop. Direct competitor: Core i3-8130U rivals Ryzen 3 2200U.