Intel Core i5-1035G4 vs Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark record splits cleanly in favor of the Intel Core i5-1035G4 across every recorded Cinebench test. The mobile Ice Lake part wins all six head-to-head comparisons, with margins ranging from 2.0% to 2.2% depending on the workload. The Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3, a Haswell-EP server processor, does not record a single victory in the database's direct comparison set.

For single-threaded workloads, the i5-1035G4 takes the lead by 2.2% in Cinebench R15 single-core (91 versus 89) and by 2.1% in both R20 single-core (381 versus 373) and R23 single-core (908 versus 889). These are modest but consistent advantages, reflecting the newer Sunny Cove-U core design's efficiency at lower clock speeds. The Xeon's higher 3.70 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost do not translate into a win, as the i5-1035G4's 3.70 GHz boost matches the Xeon's base while delivering better per-clock throughput.

In multi-threaded rendering, the i5-1035G4 also prevails, with R15 multicore scoring 648 against 635 (a 2.0% delta), R20 multicore scoring 2703 against 2647 (2.1%), and R23 multicore scoring 6436 against 6303 (2.1%). Both processors have four cores and eight threads, so the differences come down to architecture efficiency rather than core count. The database's percentile ranking places both at the 42nd percentile among all CPUs, meaning they sit in the same performance tier despite their very different design goals.

The use-case split is straightforward: the i5-1035G4 is the better choice for any workload measured here, whether single-threaded responsiveness or multi-threaded rendering. The Xeon E5-1630 v3 offers no benchmark win to claim, though its server-platform features (ECC memory, quad-channel DDR4, 40 PCIe lanes) are not captured in Cinebench scores and may matter for specific workstation deployments.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core Cinebench R23 score?

A: The Intel Core i5-1035G4 scores 908, while the Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 scores 889, giving the i5 a 2.1% advantage.

Q: Are both processors equally ranked among all CPUs in the database?

A: Yes, both sit at the 42nd percentile, indicating they occupy the same overall performance tier despite different architectures and market segments.

Q: Does the Xeon E5-1630 v3 support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Xeon supports ECC memory, while the i5-1035G4 does not. This is a key platform difference not reflected in Cinebench scores.

Q: How do the two compare in multi-threaded Cinebench R20?

A: The i5-1035G4 scores 2703, and the Xeon scores 2647, a 2.1% lead for the mobile chip.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The Xeon E5-1630 v3 has a quad-channel memory bus delivering 68.3 GB/s, while the i5-1035G4 uses dual-channel memory at 51.2 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Xeon E5-1630 v3 has 10 MB shared L3, while the i5-1035G4 has 6 MB shared L3.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records six direct comparisons, and the i5-1035G4 wins every one. Starting with Cinebench R15 multicore, the i5 scores 648 against the Xeon's 635, a 2.0% margin. The single-core R15 test shows 91 versus 89, a 2.2% edge. These early results establish a pattern that holds through the newer benchmark versions.

Cinebench R20 multicore gives the i5 a 2703 score against 2647 for the Xeon, a 2.1% delta. The single-core R20 result is 381 versus 373, also a 2.1% delta. Moving to Cinebench R23, the multicore test shows 6436 versus 6303 (2.1%), and the single-core test shows 908 versus 889 (2.1%). The consistency of these margins, all within the 2.0% to 2.2% range, suggests a systematic architectural efficiency advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

The largest single percentage win for the i5 is the 2.2% in R15 single-core, while the smallest is 2.0% in R15 multicore. All other tests land at exactly 2.1%. This uniformity across different Cinebench versions, which use different rendering workloads and scaling factors, indicates that the i5-1035G4's performance advantage is stable and reproducible.

For context, the i5's average benchmark score across all database tests is 1861, while the Xeon's is 1823. The i5's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-9350K (average score 1867, delta -0.3%), the Intel Xeon E5-1630 v4 (1869, -0.4%), and the Intel Core i5-7600 (1844, +0.9%). The Xeon's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-4790S (1827, -0.2%), the Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 (1817, +0.3%), and the Intel Xeon D-1537 (1830, -0.4%). These neighboring scores place both processors in a tight cluster where small percentage differences separate adjacent entries.

Specification Differences

The two processors diverge sharply in platform design. The i5-1035G4 uses the Intel BGA 1526 socket, while the Xeon E5-1630 v3 uses Intel Socket 2011-3. The i5 has a 15W TDP, the Xeon a 140W TDP, a nine-fold difference that reflects their intended operating environments: mobile thin-and-light systems versus server/workstation chassis.

Base clocks differ significantly: the i5 runs at 1.10 GHz base with a 3.70 GHz boost, while the Xeon runs at 3.70 GHz base with a 3.80 GHz boost. The Xeon's sustained base clock is far higher, but the i5's boost matches the Xeon's base, and its architecture compensates in the recorded benchmarks.

Memory configuration also separates them. The i5 supports dual-channel DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC. The Xeon supports quad-channel DDR4 with 68.3 GB/s bandwidth and ECC memory. The Xeon's 40 PCIe lanes (Gen 3, CPU only) versus the i5's Gen 3 PCIe without a lane count in the database further distinguishes the server part.

The Xeon has no integrated graphics, while the i5 includes Iris Plus graphics. The i5's die size is 123 mm², the Xeon's is 356 mm², and the Xeon has 2,600 million transistors against no recorded transistor count for the i5. The Xeon is end-of-life in production status, the i5 remains active.

Architecture Differences

The i5-1035G4 is built on Intel's 10 nm process with the Ice Lake-U architecture, featuring Sunny Cove-U cores. The Xeon E5-1630 v3 uses the 22 nm process with the Haswell-EP architecture, based on Haswell-EP cores. Both are manufactured by Intel, but the process node gap of 10 nm versus 22 nm represents roughly two generations of fabrication improvement.

Cache layouts differ. The i5 has 80 KB L1 per core and 256 KB L2 per core, with 6 MB shared L3. The Xeon has 64 KB L1 per core and 256 KB L2 per core, with 10 MB shared L3. The Xeon's larger L3 cache (10 MB versus 6 MB) is a notable advantage for server workloads with large working sets, though it does not translate into Cinebench wins.

The i5's market segment is mobile, released on 2019-07-31, while the Xeon is a server/workstation part released on 2014-09-07. The generation labels reflect this: the i5 is listed as "Core i5 (Sunny Cove-U)" and the Xeon as "Xeon E5 (Haswell-EP)". Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, and neither has a recorded launch MSRP in the database.

Feature differences that matter for deployment: the Xeon's ECC memory support and quad-channel bandwidth make it suitable for memory-intensive server roles, while the i5's integrated Iris Plus graphics and low 15W TDP make it suitable for compact mobile devices. The Xeon's 40 PCIe lanes (CPU only) support many expansion cards, whereas the i5's PCIe configuration is not specified in lane count. The i5's active production status versus the Xeon's end-of-life status also informs long-term availability considerations.