Intel Core i3-5157U vs Intel Xeon X5492 Comparison

The Verdict

The Intel Xeon X5492 is the faster processor in every recorded benchmark comparison. It wins all five head-to-head tests, with deltas between 12.2% and 12.3% across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both single-core and multi-core. If the task is raw compute throughput, the Xeon is the clear choice. The Core i3-5157U, however, is not without its own case: it is a mobile chip with a 28 W TDP, integrated Iris 6100 graphics, and a much smaller physical footprint. The Xeon X5492 demands a server/workstation platform with Socket 771 and a 150 W TDP, so it is only practical in a system built around that ecosystem. The i3-5157U belongs in a laptop or compact all-in-one where power draw and integrated graphics matter more than peak Cinebench scores. The data shows the Xeon is for compute-first builds that can handle its thermal and platform requirements; the i3 is for portable or low-power systems where the performance gap is acceptable.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Xeon X5492 leads in all multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 2475 against the i3-5157U's 2203, a 12.3% advantage. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 249 versus 222, a 12.2% lead.

Q: Is the Core i3-5157U better for single-core workloads?

A: No. The Xeon X5492 also wins single-core tests. It scores 146 in Cinebench R20 single-core versus 130 for the i3, a 12.3% margin. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Xeon scores 349 versus 311, a 12.2% lead.

Q: Does the Core i3-5157U have integrated graphics?

A: Yes. The i3-5157U includes Intel Iris 6100 integrated graphics. The Xeon X5492 has no integrated graphics, so a discrete GPU is mandatory for any display output.

Q: What memory types does each CPU support?

A: The Xeon X5492 supports DDR2 and DDR3 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The i3-5157U supports only DDR3, also dual-channel, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s.

Q: Which CPU is more power efficient?

A: The i3-5157U has a 28 W TDP. The Xeon X5492 has a 150 W TDP. The i3 draws substantially less power, which aligns with its mobile market segment.

Q: Are both CPUs end-of-life products?

A: Yes. The database lists both as end-of-life. The Xeon X5492 was released in September 2008, and the i3-5157U was released in February 2015.

Architecture Differences

The Xeon X5492 is built on the Core 2 architecture, codenamed Harpertown, using Intel's 45 nm process node. It has 820 million transistors spread across two dies, each measuring 107 mm². The i3-5157U uses the Broadwell architecture, codenamed Broadwell-U, on a 14 nm node. It integrates 1,900 million transistors on a single 133 mm² die. The process shrink from 45 nm to 14 nm is the defining architectural shift between these two parts.

Cache layouts differ significantly. The Xeon X5492 has 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 6 MB of L2 cache per die. It has no L3 cache. The i3-5157U also has 64 KB of L1 per core, but its L2 is 256 KB per core, and it adds a shared 3 MB L3 cache. The i3's larger per-core L2 and the presence of L3 reflect its newer design, while the Xeon relies on a larger aggregate L2 across two dies.

The memory controllers also differ. The Xeon supports DDR2 and DDR3, while the i3 supports only DDR3. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the i3 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s. The Xeon's memory bandwidth is not recorded in the database. ECC memory support is present on the Xeon, absent on the i3. PCIe generation is Gen 2 for both, though the i3 lists 12 lanes (CPU only), and the Xeon's lane count is not recorded.

The i3-5157U includes Intel Iris 6100 integrated graphics. The Xeon X5492 has none. The Xeon targets the server/workstation market segment, while the i3 targets mobile. The Xeon's socket is Intel Socket 771, and the i3's is Intel BGA 1168. The i3's part number is SR26M, and the Xeon's is SLBBD. Neither CPU has an unlocked multiplier.

Specification Differences

The Xeon X5492 has 4 cores and 4 threads. The i3-5157U has 2 cores and 4 threads. The Xeon's base clock is 3.40 GHz, and the i3's base clock is 2.50 GHz. Neither has a boost clock listed. TDP is a major differentiator: the Xeon is rated at 150 W, the i3 at 28 W.

The Xeon's process node is 45 nm, the i3's is 14 nm. Transistor counts differ sharply: 820 million for the Xeon versus 1,900 million for the i3. Die size is 2x 107 mm² for the Xeon, 133 mm² for the i3. The Xeon has 6 MB of L2 per die and no L3; the i3 has 256 KB of L2 per core and 3 MB of shared L3.

Memory support: the Xeon accepts DDR2 and DDR3, the i3 only DDR3. ECC memory is supported on the Xeon, not on the i3. The i3 has integrated Iris 6100 graphics; the Xeon has none. The Xeon is a server/workstation part, the i3 is a mobile part. Release dates are also distinct: the Xeon launched in September 2008, the i3 in February 2015. The Xeon's launch MSRP was $1493, and the i3's launch MSRP was $315.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Xeon X5492 wins every recorded head-to-head test. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 249 and the i3 scores 222, a 12.2% delta. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the Xeon scores 1039 and the i3 scores 925, a 12.3% delta. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Xeon scores 2475 and the i3 scores 2203, also a 12.3% delta. The margins are consistent, hovering just above 12% across generations of the Cinebench suite.

Single-core results tell the same story. Cinebench R20 single-core has the Xeon at 146 and the i3 at 130, a 12.3% delta. Cinebench R23 single-core has the Xeon at 349 and the i3 at 311, a 12.2% delta. The Xeon's advantage is not limited to multi-threaded workloads; it also has the higher single-thread score, despite its much older architecture.

The i3-5157U does have additional benchmark data that the Xeon lacks. The database records Geekbench multi-core at 1568 and single-core at 778 for the i3. There are no Geekbench entries for the Xeon, so a comparison on that test is not possible from the recorded data. The i3's average benchmark score is 877, while the Xeon's is 852. Both CPUs sit at the 23rd percentile among all CPUs in the database. The Xeon's closest rivals include the Core i5-5250U at 856 (-0.4%), the AMD Athlon X4 830 at 848 (0.4%), the Core i5-2500T at 856 (-0.5%), and the Core i7-4500U at 859 (-0.8%). The i3's closest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 3 2300U at 880 (-0.3%), the AMD PRO A12-8870E at 880 (-0.4%), the Core i3-1000NG4 at 881 (-0.4%), and the AMD Phenom II X6 1035T at 881 (-0.5%).

The pattern is clear: the Xeon is consistently about 12% faster in Cinebench tests, but the i3 has a higher average benchmark score overall because of its Geekbench entries. The Xeon's wins are narrow but uniform, with no test where the i3 closes the gap.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon X5492 wins in every scenario where Cinebench performance is the metric. That includes multi-core rendering, single-core responsiveness, and any workload that scales with the 3.40 GHz base clock across four physical cores. The 12.2% to 12.3% margins in both single-core and multi-core tests suggest the Xeon's higher clock speed and additional cores give it a broad, consistent advantage. For a server or workstation that runs long compute jobs, the Xeon is the stronger part. Its support for DDR2 and DDR3 memory and ECC memory also makes it compatible with older enterprise platforms that require error-correcting memory. The launch MSRP of $1493 reflects its original positioning as a high-end server part.

The i3-5157U wins in platform efficiency and integration. Its 28 W TDP is dramatically lower than the Xeon's 150 W, making it suitable for laptops, compact desktops, and other systems without robust cooling. The integrated Iris 6100 graphics eliminate the need for a discrete GPU, which is a decisive factor for a small-form-factor or portable build. The i3 also has a more modern memory subsystem, with 256 KB of L2 per core, a shared 3 MB L3, and a recorded memory bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s. Its Geekbench scores, 1568 multi-core and 778 single-core, are not directly comparable to any Xeon result in the database, but they contribute to a higher average benchmark score of 877 versus 852 for the Xeon. The i3's launch MSRP was $315, which is far lower than the Xeon's, though pricing comparisons beyond that are not part of this analysis. For a mobile or low-power build that needs integrated graphics and modest compute, the i3 is the practical choice. For raw Cinebench throughput and server-grade features like ECC memory, the Xeon is the one to pick.