Intel Core i5-1130G7 vs Intel Xeon E3-1240 v5 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E3-1240 v5 and the Intel Core i5-1130G7 are separated by five years of architecture design and a chasm of intended use, yet the benchmark data places them on nearly equal footing. Both processors deliver a 4-core/8-thread configuration, and their average benchmark scores are virtually identical—the Xeon posts a 2030 average, while the Core i5 sits just four points behind at 2026. The Xeon edges out the Core i5 in every single Cinebench test, but the winning margins are so narrow that the results feel more like a statistical tie than a competitive victory. The Xeon holds a 45th percentile ranking among all CPUs, and the Core i5 matches that exact percentile, confirming that these two parts will feel interchangeable in most workloads despite their vastly different origins.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking pattern in the head-to-head results is the consistency of the margins. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 707 against the Core i5's 706, a delta of just 0.1%. The single-core R15 run is a dead heat at 99 points apiece, with a 0% delta. Moving to Cinebench R20, the Xeon again leads by a hair: 2948 versus 2942 in multi-core (0.2% delta) and 416 versus 415 in single-core (0.2% delta). The trend continues in Cinebench R23, where the Xeon posts 7020 multi-core and 991 single-core, against the Core i5's 7006 and 989, respectively—both results showing a 0.2% advantage for the Xeon.

These numbers tell a clear story: the Core i5-1130G7 is not merely competitive with the older Xeon; it is effectively its equal in raw throughput. The Xeon sweeps all six benchmark comparisons, but the largest winning margin is a mere 0.2%. For context, the Xeon's nearest rival, the Intel Core i7-5775R, scores 2031 on average—just 0.1% above the Xeon—while the Core i5-1130G7 sits at a 0.2% disadvantage in that same comparison. The data suggests that any real-world difference between these two chips would be imperceptible in multi-threaded rendering or single-threaded responsiveness.

The single-core numbers deserve extra attention. The Xeon's 99-point R15 single-core result and 991-point R23 single-core result are barely above the Core i5's 99 and 989. For a 2015 server/workstation chip to match a 2020 mobile processor in single-thread performance is notable, but it also reflects how far laptop silicon has come. The Core i5 achieves this parity while consuming a fraction of the power, which is the real headline hiding behind the near-identical scores.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1240 v5 leads with an average benchmark score of 2030, while the Intel Core i5-1130G7 trails by only four points at 2026. The Xeon's nearest rival, the Intel Core i7-5775R, scores 2031, showing all three parts within a razor-thin margin.

Q: Are the two CPUs tied in any benchmark?

A: Yes, in Cinebench R15 single-core, both processors score exactly 99 points, resulting in a 0% delta. This is the only test where the two are mathematically identical, though the Xeon wins the other five tests by margins of 0.1% or 0.2%.

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

A: The Core i5-1130G7 offers 68.3 GB/s of memory bandwidth, which is double the Xeon's 34.1 GB/s. Both support dual-channel memory, but the Core i5 only supports DDR4, while the Xeon supports both DDR3 and DDR4.

Q: Which chip has integrated graphics?

A: Only the Core i5-1130G7 includes integrated graphics, featuring Iris Xe Graphics G7 with 80 execution units. The Xeon E3-1240 v5 has no integrated graphics listed, which is typical for its server/workstation market segment.

Q: How do the two compare in terms of production status and release date?

A: The Xeon E3-1240 v5 is end-of-life and was released in October 2015. The Core i5-1130G7 is active and was released in September 2020, making it nearly five years newer.

Q: Which chip has a higher boost clock?

A: The Core i5-1130G7 boosts to 4.00 GHz, slightly higher than the Xeon's 3.90 GHz. However, the Xeon has a much higher base clock of 3.50 GHz compared to the Core i5's 1100.00 MHz, reflecting the mobile chip's power-saving design.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two parts is vast, yet the benchmark results show how far efficiency has come. The Xeon E3-1240 v5 is built on Intel's 14 nm process node using the Skylake-DT architecture, with a die size of 122 mm² and 1,750 million transistors. The Core i5-1130G7 uses the newer 10 nm process node and the Tiger Lake-U architecture, which is built on the Willow Cove microarchitecture. The Xeon's larger, older process is a clear disadvantage in power efficiency, but it does not translate into a performance deficit in these tests.

Cache configurations differ substantially between the two. The Xeon offers 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, while the Core i5 increases L1 to 96 KB per core and L2 to 1.25 MB per core. Both share 8 MB of L3 cache, so the total cache pool is similar, but the Core i5's larger per-core caches give it an advantage in latency-sensitive workloads. The Xeon compensates with a higher base clock, but the Core i5's 4.00 GHz boost clock edges out the Xeon's 3.90 GHz.

Memory and I/O features further separate the two. The Xeon supports ECC memory, a critical feature for server and workstation reliability, while the Core i5 does not. The Core i5 supports PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes, while the Xeon is limited to PCIe Gen 3 with the same 16 lanes. The Core i5 also doubles the memory bandwidth to 68.3 GB/s versus the Xeon's 34.1 GB/s. The Core i5 includes integrated Iris Xe graphics, while the Xeon has none, making the Core i5 a more versatile package for systems without a discrete GPU.

Specification Differences

The most obvious difference is power consumption: the Xeon has a 80 W TDP, while the Core i5 sips just 15 W. This is a 65 W gap that defines their respective markets—the Xeon is a socketed server part for Intel Socket 1151, while the Core i5 is a soldered mobile part for Intel BGA 1598. The Xeon's base clock of 3.50 GHz is dramatically higher than the Core i5's 1100.00 MHz base, but the boost clocks are close at 3.90 GHz versus 4.00 GHz. The Core i5's low base clock is a trade-off to keep the 15 W TDP in check during idle and light loads.

The Xeon supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory, while the Core i5 is DDR4-only. Memory bandwidth favors the Core i5 at 68.3 GB/s versus 34.1 GB/s. ECC memory support is exclusive to the Xeon, which also has a higher launch MSRP of $282; the Core i5 has no launch MSRP listed. The Xeon has a part number (SR2LD) and a known die size, while the Core i5 lists neither transistors nor die size. The Xeon is marked as end-of-life, while the Core i5 remains active in production.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon E3-1240 v5 wins on every benchmark in this comparison, but the margins are so small that its victories are symbolic rather than practical. It takes the multi-core R15, R20, and R23 tests, along with the single-core equivalents, with deltas ranging from 0.1% to 0.2%. Its higher base clock and mature Skylake architecture give it a slight edge in sustained all-core workloads, and its ECC memory support makes it the only choice for error-critical server or workstation builds. The Xeon's 80 W TDP implies it can maintain its clocks under load without the thermal throttling concerns of a 15 W mobile part.

The Core i5-1130G7 wins in every category that matters for modern mobile use, even if the benchmark scores don't reflect it. Its 15 W TDP means it can deliver near-identical performance while generating a fraction of the heat, making it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where the Xeon would be impractical. The Core i5's integrated Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU eliminates the need for a discrete GPU in basic systems, while its PCIe Gen 4 support and double memory bandwidth provide a more modern I/O foundation. The 68.3 GB/s memory bandwidth is a massive advantage for memory-bound tasks, even if Cinebench doesn't fully expose it.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear choice based on platform, not performance. If you are building a socketed system with an existing LGA 1151 motherboard and need ECC memory support, the Xeon E3-1240 v5 is the pick—it wins all six Cinebench tests, even if only by 0.2% at most, and its 80 W TDP is manageable with a capable air cooler. Its end-of-life status and 2015 release date mean it is a legacy option, but the benchmark parity with a 2020 chip is impressive.

If you are buying a laptop or a compact mobile system, the Core i5-1130G7 is the only realistic choice. Its 15 W TDP enables fanless or low-noise designs, and its integrated Iris Xe graphics cover display output without a GPU. The performance is effectively identical to the Xeon, with the Core i5 trailing by just 0.2% in average score, while offering superior memory bandwidth, PCIe Gen 4, and a newer process node. The Xeon's wins are real but negligible; the Core i5's efficiency and platform advantages are decisive for any new purchase. Both sit at the 45th percentile among all CPUs, so neither is a performance outlier—they are simply two very different paths to the same destination.