Intel Core i5-10500 vs Intel Xeon E3-1285 v6 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E3-1285 v6 and the Intel Core i5-10500 occupy different corners of the Intel lineup, yet they land in the same performance percentile. The Xeon, a Kaby Lake-DT part aimed at servers and workstations, posts an average benchmark score of 2348 and sits at the 48th percentile. The Core i5-10500, a Comet Lake desktop processor, averages 2446 and also sits at the 48th percentile. In direct head-to-head Cinebench testing, the Core i5-10500 wins all six recorded comparisons.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i5-10500 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Xeon E3-1285 v6 has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Xeon E3-1285 v6 supports ECC memory. The Core i5-10500 does not support ECC memory.

Q: What are the base and boost clock speeds?

A: The Xeon E3-1285 v6 has a base clock of 4.10 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. The Core i5-10500 has a base clock of 3.10 GHz and the same boost clock of 4.50 GHz.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The Core i5-10500 has 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Xeon E3-1285 v6 has 8 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor is newer?

A: The Core i5-10500 was released on 2020-04-29. The Xeon E3-1285 v6 was released on 2017-07-31.

Q: Which processor wins in the recorded Cinebench benchmarks?

A: The Core i5-10500 wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, with deltas ranging from 6.4% to 6.6% in its favor.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on Intel's 14 nm process node and use the same per-core L1 and L2 cache sizes: 64 KB per core for L1 and 256 KB per core for L2. The similarities end there.

The Xeon E3-1285 v6 uses the Kaby Lake architecture with the Kaby Lake-DT codename, while the Core i5-10500 uses the Comet Lake architecture. The Xeon is built for the Intel Socket 1151 platform, whereas the Core i5-10500 uses the Intel Socket 1200 platform. These are physically different sockets, so the two processors are not interchangeable in a motherboard.

The core configuration differs substantially. The Xeon has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Core i5-10500 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Core i5-10500 has two additional cores and four additional threads. The shared L3 cache also favors the Core i5: 12 MB versus 8 MB.

Memory support is DDR4 dual-channel on both, but the Core i5-10500 lists a memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s, while the Xeon does not have a recorded memory bandwidth figure. The Xeon supports ECC memory, a feature absent from the Core i5-10500. Both use PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The Xeon carries HD Graphics P630, while the Core i5-10500 carries UHD Graphics 630. The market segments also differ: the Xeon is classified as Server/Workstation, and the Core i5 is classified as Desktop. The Xeon's production status is not recorded, while the Core i5 is listed as Active.

The release dates are far apart. The Xeon arrived on 2017-07-31, and the Core i5-10500 arrived on 2020-04-29. The part numbers are SR373 for the Xeon and SRH3A for the Core i5.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data is unambiguous. In the six head-to-head Cinebench tests recorded in the database, the Core i5-10500 wins every single one. The Xeon E3-1285 v6 records zero wins in the head-to-head comparison.

The Core i5-10500's advantage comes from its higher core and thread count. With 6 cores and 12 threads against 4 cores and 8 threads, the Core i5 has more parallel execution resources. This shows up in both multi-core and single-core Cinebench results. The Core i5 leads by 6.5% in Cinebench R15 multi-core, 6.5% in R15 single-core, 6.6% in R20 multi-core, 6.4% in R20 single-core, 6.5% in R23 multi-core, and 6.5% in R23 single-core.

The Xeon does have areas where it is not beaten. It supports ECC memory, which the Core i5 does not. That makes the Xeon the appropriate choice for memory-integrity-sensitive workloads such as error-correcting server or workstation tasks. The Xeon also has a higher base clock of 4.10 GHz versus 3.10 GHz, which can help in lightly threaded workloads that do not reach boost frequencies, although the recorded single-core benchmarks still favor the Core i5.

The Xeon's market segment is Server/Workstation, while the Core i5 is a Desktop part. For a system that requires ECC and a server-class feature set, the Xeon is the only one of the two that qualifies. For raw Cinebench throughput, the Core i5 is the clear winner.

Looking at the average benchmark scores, the Core i5-10500 posts 2446, and the Xeon E3-1285 v6 posts 2348. Both sit at the 48th percentile among all CPUs in the database. The Core i5's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon D-1541 at 2447, the Intel Core i3-1125G4 at 2451, the Intel Core i5-8600 at 2454, and the Intel Xeon D-1540 at 2467. The Xeon's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-9600 at 2354, the AMD Ryzen 5 2500X at 2361, the Intel Xeon E-2226GE at 2365, and the Intel Xeon E-2234 at 2374.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two processors:

• Cores: 4 (Xeon) versus 6 (Core i5)
• Threads: 8 (Xeon) versus 12 (Core i5)
• Base clock: 4.10 GHz (Xeon) versus 3.10 GHz (Core i5)
• Boost clock: 4.50 GHz on both
• TDP: 79 W (Xeon) versus 65 W (Core i5)
• Socket: Intel Socket 1151 (Xeon) versus Intel Socket 1200 (Core i5)
• Architecture: Kaby Lake (Xeon) versus Comet Lake (Core i5)
• Codename: Kaby Lake-DT (Xeon) versus Comet Lake (Core i5)
• L3 cache: 8 MB shared (Xeon) versus 12 MB shared (Core i5)
• Memory bandwidth: not recorded (Xeon) versus 42.7 GB/s (Core i5)
• ECC memory: supported (Xeon) versus not supported (Core i5)
• Integrated graphics: HD Graphics P630 (Xeon) versus UHD Graphics 630 (Core i5)
• Market segment: Server/Workstation (Xeon) versus Desktop (Core i5)
• Production status: not recorded (Xeon) versus Active (Core i5)
• Release date: 2017-07-31 (Xeon) versus 2020-04-29 (Core i5)
• Part number: SR373 (Xeon) versus SRH3A (Core i5)

Both processors share the 14 nm process node, 64 KB per-core L1 cache, 256 KB per-core L2 cache, DDR4 dual-channel memory support, PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes, and a locked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are consistent across all six Cinebench tests. The Core i5-10500 wins every test, and the margin is nearly uniform.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Core i5-10500 scores 875 against the Xeon's 818. That is a 6.5% lead for the Core i5. The single-core R15 test shows the same pattern: 123 for the Core i5 versus 115 for the Xeon, again a 6.5% lead.

Cinebench R20 multi-core gives the Core i5 a score of 3648 and the Xeon 3409, a 6.6% difference. The R20 single-core test shows 514 versus 481, a 6.4% lead.

Cinebench R23 multi-core records 8686 for the Core i5 and 8119 for the Xeon, a 6.5% lead. The R23 single-core test shows 1226 versus 1146, also a 6.5% lead.

The consistency of the margin is notable. Across all six tests, the Core i5-10500 leads by between 6.4% and 6.6%. This uniformity suggests the advantage is structural rather than workload-specific. The Core i5's additional two cores and four threads provide a steady throughput advantage in multi-core rendering, and its higher single-core scores indicate that its per-thread performance is also slightly better despite the Xeon's higher base clock.

The Xeon's best result relative to the Core i5 comes in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the gap narrows to 6.4%. Its largest deficit is in R20 multi-core at 6.6%. These are small differences, but they are consistent across every recorded test.

The database also records Geekbench results for the Core i5-10500: 3381 in multi-core and 1117 in single-core. No Geekbench results are recorded for the Xeon E3-1285 v6, so no direct comparison is possible in that test.

In summary, the Core i5-10500 is the faster processor in every recorded benchmark. The Xeon E3-1285 v6 retains its relevance through ECC memory support and its server/workstation positioning, but for raw Cinebench performance, the Core i5-10500 holds a clear and consistent advantage.