Intel Atom C5125 vs Intel Xeon E5-2628 v3 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmark tests in this comparison?

A: The Intel Atom C5125 wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, covering R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core runs.

Q: How large are the performance differences?

A: The Atom C5125 leads by 2.0% to 2.2% across all tests. The smallest margin is 2.0% in R15 single-core, while the largest is 2.2% in R15 multi-core, R20 multi-core, and R23 single-core.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each chip?

A: Both processors have 8 cores. The Atom C5125 has 8 threads, while the Xeon E5-2628 v3 has 16 threads due to Hyper-Threading support.

Q: How do their power envelopes compare?

A: The Atom C5125 has a TDP of 50 watts, while the Xeon E5-2628 v3 has a TDP of 85 watts. The Atom draws less power despite winning every benchmark.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The Atom C5125 uses dual-channel DDR4 with a bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s. The Xeon E5-2628 v3 uses quad-channel DDR4 with a bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s.

Q: Which processor is still in production?

A: The Intel Atom C5125 is listed as Active, while the Intel Xeon E5-2628 v3 is marked End-of-life. The Atom was released in 2022, while the Xeon launched in 2014.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data shows a clear and uniform pattern: the Intel Atom C5125 wins every single recorded test. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 739 versus 723 for the Xeon, a 2.2% advantage. In single-core R15, the Atom scores 104 against 102, a 2% edge. The R20 multi-core test gives the Atom 3081 points versus 3015, again 2.2% ahead. Single-core R20 shows 434 versus 425, a 2.1% lead. R23 multi-core results are 7336 for the Atom and 7179 for the Xeon, 2.2% higher. Finally, R23 single-core records 1035 against 1013, another 2.2% win.

Interestingly, the Xeon E5-2628 v3 holds advantages in areas that do not translate into benchmark wins. It has 16 threads versus 8, a quad-channel memory bus versus dual-channel, and a higher memory bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s versus 46.9 GB/s. It also has a larger L3 cache of 20 MB shared, while the Atom has no L3 cache listed. Despite these specifications favoring the Xeon, the Atom's benchmark scores are consistently higher.

For single-threaded workloads, the Atom's lead ranges from 2.0% to 2.2% depending on the Cinebench version. For multi-threaded workloads, the Atom's lead is a steady 2.2% across R15, R20, and R23. The Xeon's extra threads do not help it close the gap in these specific rendering tests. The Atom also wins on power efficiency, with a 50-watt TDP compared to the Xeon's 85 watts, making it the better choice for power-constrained deployments.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The Intel Atom C5125 is built on the Parker Ridge codename with a Tremont microarchitecture, manufactured on a 10 nm process. The Intel Xeon E5-2628 v3 uses the Haswell-EP microarchitecture with the Haswell codename, built on a 22 nm process. The process node difference is substantial: 10 nm versus 22 nm, which explains the Atom's lower power consumption.

The Atom C5125 has a cache layout of 64 KB L1 per core and 4.5 MB L2 per module, with no L3 cache. The Xeon E5-2628 v3 has 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 20 MB shared L3. The Xeon's larger L2 and L3 caches are typical of a high-end server design from 2014, while the Atom's cache structure reflects a more modern, power-efficient approach.

The Xeon E5-2628 v3 has a die size of 356 mm² and 2,600 million transistors. The Atom C5125 has no recorded transistor count or die size in the database. The Xeon supports 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, while the Atom supports 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes. Both support ECC memory and DDR4, but the Xeon uses a quad-channel memory bus compared to the Atom's dual-channel.

The Atom C5125 has no integrated graphics, and the Xeon also has no integrated graphics listed. Both are locked from multiplier adjustment. The Atom uses an Intel BGA 2106 socket, while the Xeon uses Intel Socket 2011-3. The Xeon's larger memory bandwidth and additional PCIe lanes make it more suited to memory-intensive or I/O-heavy server roles, while the Atom's smaller footprint and lower TDP suit compact or power-sensitive systems.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across several key specifications. The Atom C5125 has 8 threads, while the Xeon E5-2628 v3 has 16 threads. The Atom has a base clock of 2.80 GHz with no boost clock listed, while the Xeon has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 3.00 GHz. The TDP differs significantly: 50 watts for the Atom versus 85 watts for the Xeon.

Memory bandwidth also differs: the Atom provides 46.9 GB/s through dual-channel DDR4, while the Xeon provides 68.3 GB/s through quad-channel DDR4. The PCIe lane count is different as well: 16 lanes for the Atom versus 40 lanes for the Xeon, both Gen 3. The process node is 10 nm for the Atom and 22 nm for the Xeon.

The socket types are not interchangeable: the Atom uses Intel BGA 2106, while the Xeon uses Intel Socket 2011-3. The production status is Active for the Atom and End-of-life for the Xeon. The release dates differ by nearly eight years, with the Atom launched in 2022 and the Xeon in 2014. The Atom has a launch MSRP of $335, while the Xeon has no launch MSRP recorded. The Xeon has a larger L3 cache of 20 MB shared, while the Atom has no L3 cache. The Xeon also has a larger die size of 356 mm² and a transistor count of 2,600 million, both of which are not recorded for the Atom.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are remarkably consistent. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Atom scores 739 versus the Xeon's 723, a 2.2% advantage. In R15 single-core, the Atom scores 104 versus 102, a 2% lead. Moving to R20 multi-core, the Atom scores 3081 versus 3015, another 2.2% margin. R20 single-core sees the Atom at 434 versus 425, a 2.1% edge. R23 multi-core shows 7336 for the Atom and 7179 for the Xeon, 2.2% higher. R23 single-core records 1035 against 1013, also 2.2% higher.

The largest margins are consistently in the multi-core tests and the R23 single-core test, all at 2.2%. The smallest margin is in R15 single-core at 2.0%. Across all six tests, the Atom never dips below a 2% lead. The Xeon's higher boost clock of 3.00 GHz versus the Atom's 2.80 GHz base clock does not translate into any single-core win. The Xeon's 16 threads do not provide a multi-core advantage either.

Looking at the average benchmark scores, the Atom has an average of 2122, while the Xeon has an average of 2076. The Atom's nearest rival is the Intel Core i7-1160G7 with an average score of 2124, a delta of -0.1%. The Xeon's nearest rival is the Intel Xeon W-2123 with an average score of 2079, a delta of -0.1%. Both processors sit at the 46th percentile among all CPUs, indicating they are in the same performance tier overall.

The Verdict

The data supports the Intel Atom C5125 as the winner in every measured benchmark category. It outperforms the Intel Xeon E5-2628 v3 by 2.0% to 2.2% across all Cinebench tests, making it the better choice for single-threaded and multi-threaded rendering workloads. Its lower TDP of 50 watts versus 85 watts means it achieves this performance with significantly less power draw.

The Xeon E5-2628 v3 remains relevant for specific scenarios based on its specifications. It offers 16 threads, 20 MB of L3 cache, 40 PCIe lanes, and a memory bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s, all of which the Atom lacks. For workloads that depend heavily on memory bandwidth, large shared caches, or extensive PCIe connectivity, the Xeon may still be the appropriate platform. However, in the Cinebench tests recorded, these advantages do not produce higher scores.

The Atom C5125 is the better choice for modern, power-efficient server or workstation deployments where the benchmark results matter most. It is also the only one of the two still in active production, with the Xeon marked as end-of-life. The Atom's 2022 release date and 10 nm process node give it a clear technological edge over the 2014-era 22 nm Xeon. For buyers focused on the measured performance data, the Atom C5125 is the recommended pick. For those needing the Xeon's specific I/O and memory capabilities, the older chip still has a role, but it cannot match the Atom in the recorded benchmarks.