Intel Core i5-10200H vs Intel Xeon E5-4648 v3 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon E5-4648 v3 wins every recorded head-to-head benchmark in this comparison, sweeping all six Cinebench tests. The Intel Core i5-10200H does not win a single recorded test. This is a clear-cut result, but the margin is smaller than the core count difference might suggest. The Xeon leads by 13.3% to 13.5% across the board, a consistent gap that reflects its architecture and thread resources rather than a dominant blowout.

The Xeon E5-4648 v3 is a server and workstation part with 12 cores and 24 threads. Its wins come in both multi-core and single-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 7701 against 6795 for the Core i5-10200H, a 13.3% advantage. In single-core R23, it scores 1087 against 959, also 13.3% ahead. The pattern repeats in R20 and R15: every test shows the Xeon ahead by roughly 13.4% or 13.5%. This consistency suggests the Xeon’s advantage is structural, not workload-specific.

The Core i5-10200H, a mobile part with 4 cores and 8 threads, is the lower performer in this matchup. Its best result is in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where it scores 684 against the Xeon’s 776. That 13.5% deficit is its smallest gap. In single-core R15, it scores 96 against 109, again 13.5% behind. The mobile chip has no test where it pulls ahead, even in single-threaded workloads where its 4.10 GHz boost clock might be expected to help.

The database shows both processors at the 47th percentile versus all CPUs, meaning the Xeon’s sweep does not translate into a higher overall percentile. The Xeon has an average benchmark score of 2227, while the Core i5-10200H averages 2154. The Xeon’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-8559U at 2225 (0.1% behind) and the Intel Xeon D-1548 at 2231 (0.2% ahead). The Core i5-10200H’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-5950HQ at 2158 (0.2% ahead) and the AMD Ryzen 3 3300X at 2148 (0.3% behind). These surrounding scores place both chips in the same performance neighborhood despite their very different designs.

For buyers, the use case split is obvious. The Xeon E5-4648 v3 is the choice for multi-threaded server workloads, though its margin over the mobile chip is modest. The Core i5-10200H is a laptop processor, and its 4.10 GHz boost clock and integrated UHD Graphics make it suitable for mobile systems, but the recorded data shows it trailing the Xeon in every Cinebench test.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and target different markets. The Xeon E5-4648 v3 uses the Haswell-EP architecture on a 22 nm process node, built by Intel with 2,600 million transistors on a 356 mm² die. It was released on 2015-05-31 and is end-of-life. The Core i5-10200H uses the Comet Lake-H architecture on a 14 nm process node, was released on 2020-09-16, and is still active. The process node difference is notable: 22 nm versus 14 nm, with the newer mobile part using a smaller node.

Core and thread counts differ sharply. The Xeon has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Core i5-10200H has 4 cores and 8 threads. This is a 3x difference in cores and threads. The Xeon’s base clock is 1.70 GHz with a boost of 2.20 GHz. The Core i5-10200H runs at 2.40 GHz base and 4.10 GHz boost. The mobile chip’s clocks are substantially higher, yet it still loses every recorded test, which points to the Xeon’s thread advantage and larger cache.

Cache hierarchies are different. Both have 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core. The Xeon has 30 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core i5-10200H has 6 MB of shared L3 cache. That is a fivefold difference in L3 capacity, which helps the Xeon in multi-threaded workloads that reuse data. The Xeon also supports quad-channel DDR4 memory with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth and ECC memory. The Core i5-10200H supports dual-channel DDR3 and DDR4 with 46.9 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC. The memory bandwidth difference is 12.8 GB/s in favor of the Xeon.

PCIe support differs. The Xeon provides Gen 3 with 40 lanes from the CPU, while the Core i5-10200H provides Gen 3 without a lane count listed. The Xeon has no integrated graphics, while the Core i5-10200H includes UHD Graphics. The Xeon uses the Intel Socket 2011-3, while the Core i5-10200H uses Intel BGA 1440, which is a soldered mobile socket. The Xeon is a server and workstation part with a launch MSRP of $2405, while the Core i5-10200H has no launch MSRP recorded and is a mobile part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a uniform result across all six Cinebench tests. The Xeon E5-4648 v3 wins every test, with deltas ranging from 13.3% to 13.5%. There is no test where the Core i5-10200H takes the lead.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 776 against 684 for the Core i5-10200H, a 13.5% margin. In R15 single-core, the Xeon scores 109 against 96, also 13.5%. This is the largest delta recorded in the matchup. The R15 tests show the widest gap, likely due to the benchmark’s shorter workload length, which can favor the Xeon’s higher thread count relative to its lower clock speed.

In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the Xeon scores 3234 against 2853, a 13.4% margin. In R20 single-core, it scores 456 against 402, again 13.4%. The R20 tests show a slightly smaller delta than R15, by 0.1 percentage point. This small shift suggests the longer R20 workload slightly narrows the gap, but the Xeon remains ahead.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Xeon scores 7701 against 6795, a 13.3% margin. In R23 single-core, it scores 1087 against 959, also 13.3%. The R23 tests show the smallest delta, 0.2 percentage points below R15. Even in the longest workload, the Xeon’s advantage holds. The progression from R15 to R23 shows a gradual tightening from 13.5% to 13.3%, but the Xeon is never challenged.

The single-core results are particularly telling. The Core i5-10200H has a 4.10 GHz boost clock, nearly double the Xeon’s 2.20 GHz boost. Yet the Xeon still wins single-core tests by 13.3% to 13.5%. This indicates that the Xeon’s per-core efficiency, likely aided by its larger 30 MB L3 cache and Haswell-EP design, overcomes the clock deficit. The Core i5-10200H’s 4-core design cannot compensate with higher clocks, even in tests that should favor it.

The data also includes results outside the head-to-head set. The Core i5-10200H has Geekbench scores of 4096 multi-core and 1347 single-core, which are not part of the head-to-head comparison. These scores are not matched by the Xeon in the recorded data, so they cannot be compared directly. The Xeon’s average benchmark score of 2227 sits close to its nearest rivals, and the Core i5-10200H’s average of 2154 also sits close to its own nearest rivals, but the head-to-head Cinebench tests are the only direct comparisons available.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmark tests?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-4648 v3 wins all 6 recorded head-to-head tests. The Intel Core i5-10200H wins none.

Q: How large is the Xeon’s lead in multi-core performance?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Xeon scores 7701 against 6795 for the Core i5-10200H, a 13.3% advantage. In R20 multi-core, the lead is 13.4% (3234 vs 2853), and in R15 multi-core it is 13.5% (776 vs 684).

Q: Does the Core i5-10200H’s higher boost clock help in single-core tests?

A: No. The Core i5-10200H boosts to 4.10 GHz, while the Xeon boosts to 2.20 GHz, but the Xeon still wins single-core tests by 13.3% to 13.5%. In R23 single-core, the Xeon scores 1087 against 959.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: The Xeon E5-4648 v3 has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Core i5-10200H has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Do the two processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Xeon E5-4648 v3 supports ECC memory. The Core i5-10200H does not.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Xeon E5-4648 v3 supports quad-channel DDR4 with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core i5-10200H supports dual-channel DDR3 and DDR4 with 46.9 GB/s bandwidth.

Specification Differences

The processors differ in nearly every major specification. The Xeon E5-4648 v3 has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Core i5-10200H has 4 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks are 1.70 GHz for the Xeon and 2.40 GHz for the Core i5-10200H. Boost clocks are 2.20 GHz and 4.10 GHz, respectively. Thermal design power is 105 W for the Xeon and 45 W for the Core i5-10200H.

The Xeon uses the Intel Socket 2011-3, while the Core i5-10200H uses Intel BGA 1440. The Xeon is built on Haswell-EP with a 22 nm process node, while the Core i5-10200H uses Comet Lake-H on a 14 nm node. The Xeon has 2,600 million transistors on a 356 mm² die; the Core i5-10200H has no transistor or die size data recorded.

Cache differs substantially. Both share 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core. The Xeon has 30 MB shared L3, while the Core i5-10200H has 6 MB shared L3. Memory support is DDR4 for the Xeon and DDR3 plus DDR4 for the Core i5-10200H. The Xeon uses a quad-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support. The Core i5-10200H uses a dual-channel bus with 46.9 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC.

PCIe support is Gen 3 with 40 CPU lanes for the Xeon, while the Core i5-10200H lists Gen 3 without a lane count. The Xeon has no integrated graphics; the Core i5-10200H includes UHD Graphics. The Xeon is in the server and workstation market segment and is end-of-life, with a release date of 2015-05-31 and a launch MSRP of $2405. The Core i5-10200H is in the mobile segment and is active, released on 2020-09-16 with no launch MSRP recorded. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. Part numbers are SR26R for the Xeon and SRK3X for the Core i5-10200H.