Intel Core i5-10400H vs Intel Xeon D-1715TER Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data delivers a clear and consistent verdict: the Intel Xeon D-1715TER wins every single head-to-head comparison against the Intel Core i5-10400H. Across all six recorded Cinebench tests, the Xeon D-1715TER posts a lead of approximately 10.5% in every multicore workload and between 10.1% and 10.5% in single-core tests. There is no test in the database where the Core i5-10400H comes out ahead.

Starting with multicore performance, the Xeon D-1715TER scores 779 in Cinebench R15 multicore versus 697 for the Core i5-10400H, a delta of 10.5%. The pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multicore, where the Xeon records 3249 against 2908, again a 10.5% advantage. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Xeon reaches 7738 while the Core i5-10400H manages 6924, maintaining that same 10.5% gap. These consistent margins across three different Cinebench versions indicate a stable performance differential rather than a workload-specific anomaly.

Single-core results tell the same story. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Xeon D-1715TER scores 109 versus 98, a 10.1% lead. Cinebench R20 single-core shows 458 against 410, a 10.5% edge. Cinebench R23 single-core completes the sweep with 1092 versus 977, once again a 10.5% difference. The near-uniform delta of roughly 10.5% across both single-core and multicore tests suggests the Xeon's advantage is architectural and scales evenly across threaded and unthreaded workloads.

The Core i5-10400H does have a Geekbench result in the database, scoring 5000 multicore and 1413 single-core, but the Xeon D-1715TER has no corresponding Geekbench entry, so no direct comparison is possible in that test suite. The recorded wins tally confirms the sweep: the Xeon D-1715TER wins 6 benchmarks, the Core i5-10400H wins 0.

For context on how each processor sits among its peers, the database places both at the 47th percentile of all CPUs. The Core i5-10400H has an average benchmark score of 2303, landing within 0.7% of the Intel Xeon E-2134 at 2319 and within 0.7% of the AMD Ryzen 7 2700 at 2320. It sits 0.2% behind the Intel Core i7-8809G at 2307 and 0.9% ahead of the Intel Xeon E5-2629 v3 at 2283. The Xeon D-1715TER, with an average score of 2238, is 0.3% ahead of the Intel Xeon D-1548 at 2231, 0.5% ahead of the Intel Xeon E5-4648 v3 at 2227, 0.3% behind the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 at 2246, and 0.5% behind the Intel Core i7-10710U at 2248. Neither processor dramatically outperforms its closest rivals; the differences are within a single percentage point in both directions.

The Verdict

The verdict from the recorded data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon D-1715TER is the faster processor in every benchmark where both were measured. Buyers seeking raw compute performance in Cinebench workloads should choose the Xeon D-1715TER, as it delivers a consistent 10.5% advantage over the Core i5-10400H in both single-core and multicore tests. That is not a marginal or context-dependent edge; it is a uniform lead across every available comparison point.

The Intel Core i5-10400H, however, is not without its own case. It carries a lower TDP of 45 watts versus 50 watts for the Xeon, making it the more power-efficient option on paper. It also features integrated UHD Graphics, while the Xeon D-1715TER has no integrated graphics at all, meaning the Core i5-10400H can run a display without a discrete GPU. For a mobile system where power draw and graphics output matter, the Core i5-10400H holds practical advantages that the benchmark scores do not capture.

The market segments reinforce this split. The Core i5-10400H is classified as a Mobile processor, released on April 1, 2020, while the Xeon D-1715TER is a Server/Workstation part released on February 23, 2022. The Xeon targets environments where raw throughput and reliability features take priority over power efficiency and integrated graphics. The Core i5-10400H targets laptops and compact mobile systems. The data shows that if performance is the sole criterion, the Xeon D-1715TER wins outright; if power draw, graphics output, and mobile form factor are the priorities, the Core i5-10400H is the only one of the two that fits those requirements.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel architecture families and manufacturing nodes. The Intel Core i5-10400H is built on the Comet Lake architecture, specifically Comet Lake-H, using a 14 nm process node from Intel. The Intel Xeon D-1715TER is built on the Ice Lake architecture, specifically Ice Lake-D, using a 10 nm process node, also from Intel. The newer 10 nm node gives the Xeon a manufacturing advantage that likely contributes to its higher benchmark scores despite a lower boost clock.

Cache layouts differ substantially. The Core i5-10400H has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Xeon D-1715TER has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 10 MB of shared L3 cache. The Xeon's larger per-core L1 and L2 caches, combined with 4 MB more shared L3 cache, provide a memory hierarchy advantage that aligns with its superior benchmark results.

Memory support also diverges. The Core i5-10400H supports DDR3 and DDR4 memory with a dual-channel memory bus and a memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s. It does not support ECC memory. The Xeon D-1715TER supports DDR4 only, but uses a triple-channel memory bus with a memory bandwidth of 64.0 GB/s, and it does support ECC memory. The Xeon's higher memory bandwidth and ECC support are typical of server-oriented designs and are directly relevant to its workload profile.

PCIe capabilities differ as well. The Core i5-10400H uses PCIe Gen 3, while the Xeon D-1715TER uses PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes available on the CPU only. The Xeon's newer PCIe generation offers greater I/O bandwidth for expansion devices. The Core i5-10400H includes integrated UHD Graphics; the Xeon D-1715TER has no integrated graphics, reflecting its server positioning where a discrete or management GPU is expected.

Specification Differences

The two CPUs differ in several core specifications. The Core i5-10400H has a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The Xeon D-1715TER has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.50 GHz. Despite the Core i5-10400H having higher clock speeds on paper, the Xeon still wins every benchmark, indicating that architectural efficiency and cache capacity outweigh raw clock rates in these tests.

Both processors have 4 cores and 8 threads, so thread count is not a differentiating factor. TDP differs: the Core i5-10400H is rated at 45 watts, the Xeon D-1715TER at 50 watts. Sockets are different, with the Core i5-10400H using Intel BGA 1440 and the Xeon D-1715TER using Intel BGA 2227. The part numbers also differ: SRH8R for the Core i5-10400H and SRLBX for the Xeon D-1715TER. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not available on either part.

Release dates are separated by nearly two years. The Core i5-10400H launched on April 1, 2020; the Xeon D-1715TER launched on February 23, 2022. Both processors remain in active production status according to the database. The Core i5-10400H is assigned to the Core 10th Gen series, while the Xeon D-1715TER has no series designation recorded. Neither processor has a recorded launch MSRP in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has higher benchmark scores, the Intel Core i5-10400H or the Intel Xeon D-1715TER?

A: The Intel Xeon D-1715TER wins all six head-to-head Cinebench benchmarks. It leads by 10.5% in Cinebench R15 multicore, R20 multicore, R20 single-core, and R23 multicore, by 10.1% in R15 single-core, and by 10.5% in R23 single-core.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-10400H have a higher boost clock than the Xeon D-1715TER?

A: Yes. The Core i5-10400H has a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, while the Xeon D-1715TER has a boost clock of 3.50 GHz. Despite the lower boost clock, the Xeon still wins every recorded benchmark.

Q: Do both processors have the same number of cores and threads?

A: Yes. Both the Intel Core i5-10400H and the Intel Xeon D-1715TER have 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Xeon D-1715TER supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i5-10400H does not support ECC memory.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-10400H have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the Intel Core i5-10400H includes UHD Graphics. The Intel Xeon D-1715TER has no integrated graphics.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two processors?

A: The Intel Core i5-10400H has a TDP of 45 watts, while the Intel Xeon D-1715TER has a TDP of 50 watts.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon D-1715TER wins in every performance benchmark recorded. Any workload measured by Cinebench, whether single-core or multicore, favors the Xeon by approximately 10.5%. Its larger cache hierarchy, with 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 10 MB shared L3, along with triple-channel memory at 64.0 GB/s and ECC support, positions it for server and workstation tasks where sustained throughput and data integrity are critical. The Xeon also brings PCIe Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes, making it the better choice for systems with high-bandwidth storage or accelerator cards.

The Intel Core i5-10400H wins in scenarios where its lower 45 watt TDP matters, where integrated UHD Graphics are needed without a discrete GPU, and where the mobile BGA 1440 socket fits the intended platform. It supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory, which offers memory flexibility that the Xeon's DDR4-only support does not. For a laptop or compact mobile system, the Core i5-10400H is the only one of the two with integrated graphics, so any display output requirement automatically favors this part.

The use-case split follows the market segment labels in the database. The Core i5-10400H is a Mobile processor; the Xeon D-1715TER is a Server/Workstation processor. If the task is running a server or a workstation where power draw and integrated graphics are secondary concerns, the Xeon D-1715TER is the clear pick from the data. If the task is a mobile deployment where power efficiency, graphics output, and a mobile socket are required, the Core i5-10400H is the appropriate choice, accepting its performance deficit. The recorded data does not show any benchmark where the Core i5-10400H outperforms the Xeon, so the decision rests entirely on platform requirements rather than measured compute performance.