Intel Core i5-1145G7E vs Intel Xeon D-1715TER Comparison

The Intel Xeon D-1715TER and Intel Core i5-1145G7E are two Intel 10 nm processors built for very different jobs: one targets the server and workstation segment, the other the mobile segment. Both share a 4-core, 8-thread configuration, and the database places them at the same 47th percentile against all recorded CPUs. Yet the benchmark data tells a strikingly one-sided story, with the Xeon sweeping every Cinebench test. What separates them is not raw throughput but platform character: memory subsystem, error correction, PCIe lanes, power envelope, and graphics support all diverge sharply.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Across all six recorded Cinebench tests, the Intel Xeon D-1715TER wins every time, and by a remarkably consistent margin of roughly 3 percent.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon D-1715TER scores 779 against 757 for the Core i5-1145G7E, a 2.9 percent lead. The single-core result follows the same pattern: 109 versus 106, again 2.8 percent in the Xeon's favor. Cinebench R20 stretches the gap slightly, with the Xeon posting 3249 multi-core and 458 single-core against the i5's 3156 and 445, deltas of 2.9 percent on both counts. Cinebench R23, the most demanding of the three revisions, shows the widest multi-core separation: 7738 versus 7516, a 3 percent win for the Xeon, plus a 1092 to 1061 single-core result that lands at 2.9 percent.

The consistency is the story here. There is no test where the i5-1145G7E pulls ahead, and no test where the Xeon's lead breaks out of the narrow band between 2.8 and 3 percent. The Xeon achieves this despite its lower 3.50 GHz maximum boost, compared with 4.10 GHz for the i5, suggesting sustained all-core behavior and memory throughput matter more in these renders than peak single-core frequency.

The aggregate scores mirror this. The Xeon D-1715TER carries an average benchmark score of 2238 against 2174 for the i5-1145G7E. Context from the database reinforces how close these two sit to each other: the Xeon's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon D-1548 at 2231 (0.3 percent behind), the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 at 2246 (0.3 percent ahead), and the Intel Core i7-10710U at 2248 (0.5 percent ahead), while the i5-1145G7E is essentially tied with the AMD Ryzen 5 3400GE at 2175 and sits within 0.2 percent of the Intel Core i7-1185GRE at 2178.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in Cinebench?

A: The Intel Xeon D-1715TER wins all six recorded Cinebench tests, by margins between 2.8 and 3 percent. Its largest win is the Cinebench R23 multi-core result: 7738 versus 7516.

Q: Do the two processors have the same core and thread counts?

A: Yes. Both are 4-core, 8-thread parts built on Intel's 10 nm process, and both sit in the 47th percentile versus all CPUs in the database.

Q: Which chip has the higher clock speeds?

A: The Core i5-1145G7E boosts higher, reaching 4.10 GHz versus 3.50 GHz for the Xeon. The Xeon has the higher base specification, with a base clock of 2.40 GHz. Despite the i5's higher peak boost, the Xeon still wins every benchmark.

Q: Which one supports ECC memory?

A: Only the Xeon D-1715TER supports ECC memory. It also uses a triple-channel DDR4 bus rated at 64.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The i5-1145G7E lacks ECC support and uses a dual-channel bus compatible with DDR4 and LPDDR4X.

Q: Do either of these include integrated graphics?

A: Only the Core i5-1145G7E, which pairs Iris Xe Graphics G7 with 80 execution units. The Xeon D-1715TER has no integrated graphics listed in the database.

Q: Are these chips overclockable?

A: No. Both have locked multipliers, so neither offers multiplier-based overclocking.

The Verdict

The recorded data favors the Xeon D-1715TER on pure compute: six benchmark wins from six tests, a higher average score, and identical core and thread counts. If rendering performance is the deciding factor and the platform around it fits, the Xeon is the stronger performer.

The i5-1145G7E makes its case elsewhere. It runs at a lower 28 W TDP versus 50 W for the Xeon, includes Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU integrated graphics where the Xeon lists none, and supports LPDDR4X for power-sensitive mobile designs. Its launch MSRP was $312. For a thin-and-light or embedded mobile build, these characteristics matter more than a 3 percent benchmark deficit.

In short: the Xeon D-1715TER is the pick for compute and reliability-oriented platforms, and the i5-1145G7E is the pick for power-constrained mobile systems that need display output and modern memory support.

Specification Differences

The two differ meaningfully across the platform, even though their compute silicon is closely matched.

• Base clock: 2.40 GHz for the Xeon versus 1.5 GHz for the i5-1145G7E.
• Boost clock: 3.50 GHz for the Xeon versus 4.10 GHz for the i5.
• TDP: 50 W for the Xeon versus 28 W for the i5.
• Socket: Intel BGA 2227 for the Xeon versus Intel BGA 1449 for the i5, meaning the two are not interchangeable on any board.
• Memory: DDR4 on a triple-channel bus with 64.0 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support on the Xeon, versus DDR4 and LPDDR4X on a dual-channel bus without ECC on the i5.
• PCIe: Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes on the Xeon versus Gen 4 with only 4 CPU lanes on the i5.
• Graphics: none listed on the Xeon versus Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU on the i5.
• Die size is recorded only for the i5, at 144 mm².
• Market segment and release differ: the Xeon is a Server/Workstation part released in 2022; the i5 is a Mobile part released in 2020.

Architecture Differences

Both processors come from Intel and use the 10 nm node, but they come from different architectural families. The Xeon D-1715TER belongs to the Ice Lake generation, codenamed Ice Lake-D, and is part of the Xeon D line. The Core i5-1145G7E belongs to the Tiger Lake generation, codenamed Tiger Lake-U, and belongs to the Core i5 line with Willow Cove-U cores.

Cache layouts partially diverge. Per-core L1 and L2 are identical at 80 KB and 1.25 MB respectively, but shared L3 differs: the Xeon carries 10 MB while the i5 carries 8 MB. That 2 MB difference in shared cache is one plausible contributor to the Xeon's uniform benchmark lead in multi-core rendering workloads.

Platform-level architecture diverges more sharply. The Xeon's triple-channel DDR4 with ECC and 64.0 GB/s of bandwidth reflects its server orientation, and its 16 Gen 4 CPU PCIe lanes provide substantially more device connectivity than the i5's 4 CPU lanes. The i5 counters with Tiger Lake's integrated Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU, a feature the Xeon platform does not include, along with LPDDR4X support aimed at mobile power efficiency. Both parts remain in active production status and both have locked multipliers, so neither family offers frequency tuning as an escape hatch from their respective envelopes.

Where Each One Wins

Xeon D-1715TER wins for:

• Rendering and compute, sweeping all six Cinebench tests (R15, R20, R23, multi-core and single-core) by 2.8 to 3 percent.
• Sustained workloads, where its 2.40 GHz base clock and 50 W envelope support higher baseline throughput.
• Reliability-critical deployments, thanks to ECC memory support.
• Connectivity-heavy builds, with 16 Gen 4 CPU PCIe lanes versus 4.
• Memory-bandwidth-sensitive tasks, with 64.0 GB/s across a triple-channel bus and 10 MB of shared L3.

Core i5-1145G7E wins for:

• Power-limited mobile designs, with a 28 W TDP versus 50 W.
• Systems needing display output or GPU compute from the chip itself, via Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU.
• Compact builds using LPDDR4X memory.
• Workloads that reward burst frequency, given its 4.10 GHz boost.
• Efficiency-tuned embedded applications where its 144 mm² die and mobile pedigree are the better fit.

The overall picture: two architecturally distinct 4-core, 8-thread parts that land at the same 47th percentile, with the Xeon D-1715TER taking every compute benchmark and the i5-1145G7E holding every platform advantage that mobile hardware demands.