Intel Core i5-1145G7E vs Intel Xeon E5-4648 v3 Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark database pits a 2015-era server processor against a 2020-era mobile part, and the results are surprisingly close. The Intel Xeon E5-4648 v3 wins all six recorded Cinebench comparisons, but by margins that never exceed 2.8%. The Xeon takes the multi-core tests with 12 cores and 24 threads, yet its advantage over the Core i5-1145G7E in Cinebench R23 multi-core is just 2.5%, a gap that falls within run-to-run noise on many systems. The single-core results tell a similar story: the Xeon leads by 2.8% in Cinebench R15 single-core, 2.5% in R20, and 2.5% in R23, despite the Core i5's 4.10 GHz boost clock versus the Xeon's 2.20 GHz.

The Core i5-1145G7E is the sensible pick for anyone building a compact, power-conscious system. It draws 28 W against the Xeon's 105 W, uses a 10 nm process against 22 nm, and remains in active production. The Xeon E5-4648 v3, by contrast, is end-of-life, requires the Intel Socket 2011-3 platform, and carries a launch MSRP of $2405. The Core i5's launch MSRP is $312. The Xeon's only real wins are in raw Cinebench scores, and those wins are marginal. For single-threaded workloads, the data shows the two are effectively tied. For multi-threaded workloads, the Xeon's 12 cores deliver a nominal edge, but the Core i5's newer architecture closes almost all of that gap. Anyone starting a new build should choose the Core i5-1145G7E for its efficiency, active status, and integrated Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU. The Xeon only makes sense for someone already owning a Socket 2011-3 board who needs more PCIe lanes or ECC memory support.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-4648 v3 has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core i5-1145G7E has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: How much faster is the Xeon in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: The Xeon scores 7701 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the Core i5 scores 7516. That is a 2.5% advantage for the Xeon.

Q: Does the Core i5 have integrated graphics?

A: Yes. The Intel Core i5-1145G7E includes Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU. The Xeon E5-4648 v3 has no integrated graphics.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-4648 v3 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i5-1145G7E does not.

Q: What is the production status of each chip?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-4648 v3 is end-of-life. The Intel Core i5-1145G7E is active and still in production.

Q: Which chip has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i5-1145G7E boosts to 4.10 GHz, while the Intel Xeon E5-4648 v3 boosts to 2.20 GHz.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different eras and design philosophies. The Intel Xeon E5-4648 v3 uses the Haswell architecture on a 22 nm process, codenamed Haswell-EP. It packs 2,600 million transistors into a 356 mm² die. The Intel Core i5-1145G7E uses the Tiger Lake architecture on a 10 nm process, codenamed Tiger Lake-U, with a 144 mm² die. The transistor count for the Core i5 is not listed in the database.

The Xeon's cache layout is per-core for L1 and L2, with 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, plus a shared 30 MB L3 pool. The Core i5 has larger per-core L1 at 80 KB and much larger per-core L2 at 1.25 MB, but only 8 MB of shared L3. The Core i5's larger L2 reflects a newer architecture designed to hide memory latency with fewer cores.

Memory support differs sharply. The Xeon supports DDR4 over a quad-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s of memory bandwidth and ECC memory enabled. The Core i5 supports DDR4 and LPDDR4X over a dual-channel bus, with no ECC support and no memory bandwidth figure recorded. The Xeon also offers more PCIe connectivity: Gen 3 with 40 lanes, versus Gen 4 with only 4 lanes on the Core i5.

The Xeon targets server and workstation workloads. The Core i5 targets mobile systems. The Xeon is end-of-life, while the Core i5 is active. The Xeon's integrated graphics field is null; the Core i5 ships with Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every headline specification. Core count: 12 versus 4. Thread count: 24 versus 8. Base clock: 1700.00 MHz for the Xeon, 1500.00 MHz for the Core i5. Boost clock: 2.20 GHz for the Xeon, 4.10 GHz for the Core i5. TDP: 105 W for the Xeon, 28 W for the Core i5.

Socket: Intel Socket 2011-3 for the Xeon, Intel BGA 1449 for the Core i5. Process node: 22 nm versus 10 nm. Die size: 356 mm² versus 144 mm². L3 cache: 30 MB shared versus 8 MB shared. L2 cache per core: 256 KB versus 1.25 MB. L1 cache per core: 64 KB versus 80 KB.

Memory bus: quad-channel for the Xeon, dual-channel for the Core i5. The Xeon has a recorded memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s; the Core i5 has none in the database. ECC memory: supported on the Xeon, not on the Core i5. PCIe: Gen 3 with 40 lanes on the Xeon, Gen 4 with 4 lanes on the Core i5. Integrated graphics: absent on the Xeon, Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU on the Core i5.

Market segment: server/workstation versus mobile. Production status: end-of-life versus active. Release date: the Xeon launched on 2015-05-31, the Core i5 on 2020-09-01. Launch MSRP: $2405 for the Xeon, $312 for the Core i5. Part numbers: SR26R for the Xeon, SRK0Z for the Core i5.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records six Cinebench comparisons between these two processors, and the Xeon wins all six. The margins are consistent, hovering around 2.5% in most tests.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 776 against the Core i5's 757, a 2.5% lead. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Xeon scores 109 against 106, a 2.8% lead. The R20 suite shows the same pattern: multi-core 3234 versus 3156, a 2.5% gap, and single-core 456 versus 445, again 2.5%. Cinebench R23 repeats it: multi-core 7701 versus 7516, a 2.5% gap, and single-core 1087 versus 1061, a 2.5% gap.

The Xeon's largest victory is in R15 single-core at 2.8%. Every other test lands at 2.5%. The Core i5 never wins a single comparison. That said, the absolute numbers are close enough that the Xeon's victory is more symbolic than practical. A 2.5% difference in Cinebench R23 multi-core translates to roughly 185 points, which many workloads would not notice.

The Xeon's 12 cores and 24 threads give it a theoretical advantage in heavily threaded rendering, but the Core i5's Tiger Lake architecture, with its 4.10 GHz boost and larger per-core caches, nearly neutralizes that advantage. The average benchmark score tells a similar story: the Xeon averages 2227, the Core i5 averages 2174, a difference of about 2.4%. Both chips sit at the 47th percentile among all CPUs in the database.

The Xeon's nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Core i7-8559U with an average score of 2225 and a delta of 0.1%, the Intel Core i7-5775C at 2224 with a 0.1% delta, the Intel Xeon D-1548 at 2231 with a -0.2% delta, and the Intel Xeon D-1715TER at 2238 with a -0.5% delta. The Core i5's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 3400GE at 2175 with a 0% delta, the Intel Core i7-1185GRE at 2178 with a -0.2% delta, the Intel Core i5-7640X at 2167 with a 0.3% delta, and the Intel Core i7-5950HQ at 2158 with a 0.8% delta.

The takeaway from the head-to-head data is that the Xeon wins on paper but not by enough to matter in most real-world scenarios. The Core i5 offers modern features, a fraction of the power draw, and a much lower launch MSRP, while trading blows with the Xeon in every recorded benchmark. The Xeon's 6 wins and 0 losses look decisive in a table, but the 2.5% margins tell the real story: this is a tie in practice, decided by architecture generation rather than core count.