Intel Core i5-1135G7 vs Intel Xeon Gold 5320 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Xeon Gold 5320 scores 31,924 versus the Core i5-1135G7's 7,909. That is a 303.6% advantage for the Xeon, reflecting its 26 cores versus 4 cores.

Q: Does the Core i5-1135G7 win any benchmark in the head-to-head comparison?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows the Xeon Gold 5320 winning all 6 benchmark tests, with no wins for the Core i5-1135G7 (winsA: 6, winsB: 0).

Q: What is the difference in single-threaded Cinebench R20 performance?

A: The Xeon Gold 5320 scores 1,892 while the Core i5-1135G7 scores 468. The Xeon leads by 304.3% in this test.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Core i5-1135G7 has a boost clock of 4.20 GHz, while the Xeon Gold 5320 boosts to 3.40 GHz. Despite the lower boost clock, the Xeon still wins all single-core Cinebench tests by over 300%.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Xeon Gold 5320 supports ECC memory (true), while the Core i5-1135G7 does not (false).

Q: What are the market segments for these two chips?

A: The Xeon Gold 5320 is a Server/Workstation part, while the Core i5-1135G7 is a Mobile processor. The Xeon is still in Active production status; the Core i5 is End-of-life.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from entirely different Intel architectures and target opposite ends of the computing spectrum. The Xeon Gold 5320 is built on Ice Lake-SP (architecture: Ice Lake) and uses the Intel Socket 4189 platform. It is a 10 nm part with 26 physical cores and 52 threads. Each core carries 64 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2, with a shared 39 MB L3 cache. This is a server-class design with eight-channel DDR4 memory support and a memory bandwidth of 191.6 GB/s. The Xeon also provides 64 PCIe Gen 4 lanes (CPU only) and supports ECC memory.

The Core i5-1135G7 is a Tiger Lake-U mobile chip on Intel BGA 1449. It uses the same 10 nm process node but packs only 4 cores and 8 threads. Its cache layout is notably different: 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and just 8 MB of shared L3. The Core i5 supports DDR4 and LPDDR4X memory over a dual-channel bus, with memory bandwidth not listed in the data. It has only 4 PCIe Gen 4 lanes (CPU only) and lacks ECC support. The Tiger Lake part also includes integrated graphics — Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU — whereas the Xeon has no integrated graphics listed.

The die size also differs: the Core i5-1135G7 is listed at 144 mm², while the Xeon Gold 5320 has no die size listed. The Core i5's base clock is listed as 1500.00 MHz (which reads as 1.50 GHz), while the Xeon's base is 2.20 GHz. However, the Core i5 boosts to 4.20 GHz versus the Xeon's 3.40 GHz — a 0.80 GHz boost advantage for the mobile chip. Despite this, the Xeon's much higher core count and cache capacity dominate in every benchmark measured.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon Gold 5320 wins everywhere in the head-to-head benchmarks. In Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both multi-core and single-core tests go to the Xeon by margins of 303.6% to 305.4%. The Xeon's 26 cores and 52 threads simply overwhelm the Core i5's 4 cores and 8 threads in multi-threaded workloads. Even in single-core tests — where the Core i5's 4.20 GHz boost should help — the Xeon still leads by over 300%. This suggests the Xeon's Ice Lake-SP core design has significantly higher instructions-per-clock (IPC) than the Tiger Lake-U part, or the benchmark environment favors the server platform.

The Core i5-1135G7's wins are not in raw performance but in platform characteristics. It is a mobile chip with a 15W TDP versus the Xeon's 185W TDP. It has integrated graphics, which the Xeon lacks. It supports LPDDR4X memory, making it suitable for thin-and-light laptops. The Core i5 also has a smaller physical footprint (BGA 1449 socket) and is end-of-life, but it carries a launch MSRP of $309 (the Xeon has no launch MSRP listed). For workloads that fit within 4 cores and 8 threads, the Core i5's higher boost clock of 4.20 GHz could theoretically offer lower latency per thread, but the benchmark data does not show this — the Xeon wins every single-core test.

For a builder, the choice is clear: the Xeon Gold 5320 is for server racks and workstation towers where power and cooling are abundant. The Core i5-1135G7 is for ultraportable laptops where the 15W TDP and integrated graphics matter more than peak throughput.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon Gold 5320 | Intel Core i5-1135G7 |

|----------------|----------------------|----------------------|

| Cores | 26 | 4 |

| Threads | 52 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 2.20 GHz | 1500.00 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.40 GHz | 4.20 GHz |

| TDP | 185 W | 15 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 4189 | Intel BGA 1449 |

| Architecture | Ice Lake | Tiger Lake |

| Codename | Ice Lake-SP | Tiger Lake-U |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 10 nm |

| Die Size | Not listed | 144 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 1.25 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 39 MB (shared) | 8 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR4, LPDDR4X |

| Memory Bus | Eight-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 191.6 GB/s | Not listed |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 64 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 4 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | None | Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Mobile |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2021-04-05 | 2020-09-01 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | $309 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | No |

| Part Number | Not listed | SRK05 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data covers six Cinebench tests, and the Xeon Gold 5320 wins all of them by a near-constant margin. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 3,217 versus the Core i5's 797 — a 303.6% lead. The single-core R15 test shows 454 versus 112, a 305.4% advantage. The pattern holds in R20: multi-core is 13,408 versus 3,321 (303.7% delta), and single-core is 1,892 versus 468 (304.3%). In R23, the Xeon's multi-core score is 31,924 versus 7,909 (303.6%), and single-core is 4,506 versus 1,116 (303.8%).

These deltas are remarkably consistent — all between 303.6% and 305.4%. This suggests the performance gap is systemic rather than workload-specific. The Xeon's advantage is roughly fourfold across the board, which aligns with its core count advantage (26 vs 4) but also shows its per-core performance is far superior. If the Core i5's higher boost clock (4.20 GHz vs 3.40 GHz) were the deciding factor in single-core tests, the gap would shrink. Instead, the Xeon's single-core scores are 4.0 to 4.05 times higher, indicating that the Ice Lake-SP core architecture delivers significantly more work per clock cycle than Tiger Lake-U.

For context, the Xeon Gold 5320's average benchmark score is 9,234, placing it at the 65th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rival is the Intel Core i7-1165G7 with an average score of 9,235 (0% delta). The Core i5-1135G7 averages 9,053, also at the 65th percentile, with its nearest rival being the Intel Core i5-8350U at 8,998 (0.6% delta). Both chips sit in the same percentile band, but the Xeon's average is dragged down by its lack of low-thread tests, while the Core i5 has a broader benchmark suite including 3DMark and PassMark tests.

The Core i5-1135G7's own benchmark data shows its strengths: a single-thread PassMark score of 2,640 and a Geekbench single-core score of 1,417. Its 3DMark scores scale from 801 (single thread) to 2,713 (max threads), showing reasonable scaling but limited by the 4-core design. The Xeon has no 3DMark or PassMark data in the FACT PACK, so direct comparison in those tests is unavailable.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon Gold 5320 outperforms the Intel Core i5-1135G7 in every benchmark where both were tested. The Xeon leads by 303.6% to 305.4% across all six Cinebench tests. If your workload involves rendering, scientific computing, or any multi-threaded server task, the Xeon's 26 cores, 52 threads, and 39 MB L3 cache make it the only rational choice. Its eight-channel memory bus and 191.6 GB/s bandwidth further cement its position for memory-intensive workloads.

The Core i5-1135G7 is not without merit, but its merits lie outside the benchmark comparison. It is a 15W mobile chip with integrated Iris Xe graphics, making it suitable for laptops where battery life and portability are priorities. Its 4.20 GHz boost clock is higher than the Xeon's 3.40 GHz, but this does not translate into any benchmark win — the Xeon's superior architecture wins even single-core tests by over 300%. The Core i5 supports LPDDR4X memory and has a launch MSRP of $309, but the Xeon has no launch MSRP listed for comparison.

A builder should pick the Xeon Gold 5320 for any static, power-fed workstation or server environment. It is an active production part with ECC support and 64 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, enabling large-scale expansion. The Core i5-1135G7 is end-of-life and best suited for a laptop build where the 15W TDP and integrated GPU are essential. The Xeon's 185W TDP requires serious cooling and a server platform, but the benchmark results justify that investment for throughput-oriented tasks. There is no scenario in the data where the Core i5 wins a performance comparison — the only question is whether you need the Xeon's performance at all.