Intel Core i5-11320H vs Intel Xeon E5-1650 v4 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E5-1650 v4 and the Intel Core i5-11320H make for one of the more unusual matchups in the database: an end-of-life desktop workstation processor from the Broadwell-EP generation pitted against a modern mobile Tiger Lake-H part. Despite the Xeon drawing far more power and carrying a launch MSRP of $621 versus $309 for the Core i5, the two land almost side by side in overall standing. The Xeon sits in the 52nd percentile of all recorded CPUs with an average benchmark score of 2978, while the Core i5-11320H holds the 51st percentile with an average score of 2888, a gap of roughly three percent. Yet that aggregate closeness conceals a sharply split performance profile: the Xeon wins seven of the eight head-to-head benchmarks, while the Core i5 delivers a dominant single-test win in Geekbench single-core.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster overall?

A: The Xeon E5-1650 v4 wins 7 of the 8 recorded head-to-head benchmarks, including every multi-core test and all three Cinebench single-core runs. Its average benchmark score of 2978 also edges out the Core i5's 2888.

Q: Does the Core i5-11320H win anything?

A: Yes. It wins Geekbench single-core with a score of 1592 against 1122 for the Xeon, a lead of nearly 30 percent. This is the single largest margin in the entire matchup, in either direction.

Q: How do the core counts compare?

A: The Xeon has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Core i5-11320H has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Which platform has more memory bandwidth?

A: The Xeon. Its quad-channel DDR4 configuration delivers 76.8 GB/s of bandwidth, versus 51.2 GB/s from the Core i5's dual-channel DDR4 setup.

Q: Do both chips support ECC memory?

A: No. The Xeon E5-1650 v4 supports ECC, consistent with its workstation heritage. The Core i5-11320H does not.

Q: Which is still in production?

A: The Core i5-11320H is listed as Active. The Xeon E5-1650 v4 is End-of-life, having launched on 2016-06-19, five years to the day before the Core i5's 2021-06-20 release.

Architecture Differences

These two processors belong to entirely different eras and market segments, and the architectural deltas show it. The Xeon E5-1650 v4 is a Broadwell-EP design, codename Broadwell-EP, built on Intel's 14 nm process at Intel's own foundries. It packs 3,400 million transistors onto a 246 mm² die, a large footprint that reflects its server-derived origins. The Core i5-11320H is a Tiger Lake-H design on the considerably denser 10 nm node, with a die size of 146.1 mm². Transistor count for the Core i5 is not recorded in the database.

The cache hierarchies diverge in interesting ways. The Xeon dedicates 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, but its standout figure is the 15 MB of shared L3 cache, nearly double the Core i5's 8 MB of shared L3. The Core i5 counters with much larger per-core L2: 1.25 MB per core against the Xeon's 256 KB per core, and 80 KB of L1 per core versus the Xeon's 64 KB. This reflects Tiger Lake's rebalanced cache structure, which favors fast per-core access to feed its higher boost clocks.

Platform connectivity is another dividing line. The Xeon offers 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU, suited to workstation duties with multiple add-in cards. The Core i5 offers 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, fewer in number but on a newer, faster generation of the interface. Only the Core i5 includes integrated graphics, an Iris XE 96EU unit, while the Xeon requires a discrete GPU. Both CPUs have locked multipliers, so neither offers official overclocking headroom.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon E5-1650 v4 is the clear pick for sustained multi-threaded workloads. Its 6 cores and 12 threads carry it to victory in every multi-core benchmark recorded: Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, plus Geekbench multi-core. Rendering, batch processing, and any workload that scales with threads favors the Xeon by a consistent margin of roughly five to eight percent. Its quad-channel memory subsystem and larger L3 cache reinforce that advantage in memory-hungry and data-parallel tasks, and ECC support matters for workstation and server deployments where data integrity is required.

The Core i5-11320H owns responsive, bursty, lightly threaded work. Its Geekbench single-core score of 1592 is not just a win, it is a rout: nearly 30 percent above the Xeon's 1122. That is the signature of its 4.50 GHz boost clock against the Xeon's 4.00 GHz, combined with the newer Tiger Lake architecture. For day-to-day application responsiveness, web workloads, and anything bound by a single fast thread, the Core i5 is demonstrably quicker. It also does all of this within a 28 W TDP, compared to 140 W for the Xeon, an enormous difference in power draw that makes the Core i5 viable in thin mobile designs where the Xeon is physically impossible to deploy. Add integrated graphics, PCIe Gen 4, and active production status, and the Core i5 is the more practical modern platform.

Specification Differences

• Cores/threads: Xeon 6 cores, 12 threads; Core i5 4 cores, 8 threads.
• Base/boost clock: Xeon 3.60 GHz base and 4.00 GHz boost; Core i5 2.50 GHz base and 4.50 GHz boost.
• TDP: Xeon 140 W; Core i5 28 W.
• Socket: Xeon uses Socket 2011-3; Core i5 is BGA 1449, soldered.
• Process node: Xeon 14 nm; Core i5 10 nm.
• Die size: Xeon 246 mm²; Core i5 146.1 mm².
• Cache: Xeon has 64 KB L1, 256 KB L2 per core, and 15 MB shared L3; Core i5 has 80 KB L1, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3.
• Memory: Both support DDR4, but the Xeon runs quad-channel at 76.8 GB/s while the Core i5 runs dual-channel at 51.2 GB/s.
• ECC: Supported on the Xeon only.
• PCIe: Xeon Gen 3 with 40 lanes; Core i5 Gen 4 with 20 lanes.
• Graphics: Core i5 includes Iris XE 96EU; the Xeon has none.
• Segment and status: Xeon is an end-of-life desktop part; Core i5 is an active mobile part.
• Launch MSRP: Xeon $621; Core i5 $309.
• Release dates: Xeon 2016-06-19; Core i5 2021-06-20.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results tell a story of remarkable consistency. In R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 966 against 923 for the Core i5, a 4.7 percent win. R15 single-core goes to the Xeon 136 to 130, a 4.6 percent margin. Cinebench R20 repeats the pattern almost exactly: 4028 to 3846 in multi-core (4.7 percent) and 568 to 543 in single-core (4.6 percent). R23 is no different, with the Xeon taking multi-core 9592 to 9158 and single-core 1354 to 1293, both by 4.7 percent.

What makes those single-core wins notable is that the Xeon achieves them despite a 500 MHz lower boost clock and a five-year-older architecture. The 15 MB of L3 cache and mature Broadwell-EP execution resources evidently hold up well in Cinebench's rendering loops. The Core i5's 4.50 GHz boost simply is not enough to overcome the older chip in this particular test family.

Geekbench flips that narrative. In multi-core, the Xeon extends its lead to its widest margin of the matchup, 6060 to 5620, roughly 8 percent, confirming that its two extra cores translate into real throughput when a benchmark scales across them. But in Geekbench single-core, the Core i5 scores 1592 against the Xeon's 1122, a lead of nearly 30 percent and the only loss the Xeon suffers anywhere in the recorded data. Geekbench's bursty, latency-sensitive workload profile rewards Tiger Lake's modern core design and higher clocks in a way Cinebench does not.

The wider database context confirms how evenly matched these two are in aggregate. The Xeon's average score of 2978 places it within a fraction of a percent of rivals like the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 5675U (2988) and Intel Xeon E-2334 (2988), and slightly ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 4750U (2965) and Xeon E-2278GEL (2956). The Core i5's 2888 average puts it right beside the Intel Xeon E-2414 (2905), Core i5-1335UE (2907), and Ryzen 5 PRO 1600 (2909), all slightly ahead of it, with the Ryzen 3 PRO 5475U (2865) slightly behind.

The verdict splits cleanly along workload lines. For sustained multi-threaded throughput, memory bandwidth, and ECC-backed workstation reliability, the Xeon E5-1650 v4 is the stronger performer, winning seven of eight tests. For single-thread responsiveness, power efficiency, and a modern feature set including integrated graphics and PCIe Gen 4, the Core i5-11320H is the clear choice, backed by the most lopsided result in the dataset.