Intel Core i5-1145GRE vs Intel Xeon E3-1270 v5 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a remarkably consistent pattern across all six Cinebench tests: the Intel Xeon E3-1270 v5 wins every single head-to-head matchup, though by margins that are uniformly narrow. The largest advantage appears in the Cinebench R20 multicore and singlecore tests, where the Xeon leads the Core i5-1145GRE by 1.2% in both. In the multicore test, the Xeon scores 2974 against 2940, while in the singlecore test it posts 419 versus 414. The same 1.2% edge repeats in Cinebench R23 multicore, with the Xeon at 7082 and the Core i5 at 7001.

The Cinebench R15 results tell a similar story. In the multicore test, the Xeon E3-1270 v5 scores 713 against 705 for the Core i5-1145GRE, a 1.1% lead. In the singlecore test, the Xeon posts 100 versus 99, also a 1% advantage. The Cinebench R23 singlecore test rounds out the sweep with the Xeon at 999 and the Core i5 at 988, another 1.1% margin.

What is notable here is not the size of the wins, but their consistency. The Xeon E3-1270 v5 is ahead in every workload category, from the older R15 renderer to the newer R23 version, and in both single-threaded and multi-threaded scenarios. There is no test in the database where the Core i5-1145GRE pulls ahead, even by a fraction of a point. The deltas are all between 1% and 1.2%, which places these two processors very close together in raw compute performance.

Looking at the average benchmark score, the Xeon E3-1270 v5 posts 2048, while the Core i5-1145GRE averages 2025. That is a difference of roughly 1.1%, which aligns with the head-to-head deltas. The Xeon also sits slightly higher in the overall percentile ranking, at 46 versus 45 for the Core i5. Both chips are essentially in the same performance tier, but the Xeon consistently holds the top position.

The nearest rivals data reinforces the picture. The Xeon E3-1270 v5 is bracketed by the Intel Core i7-7820HK at an identical 2048 average score with a 0% delta, the AMD Ryzen 5 7520U at 2046 (0.1% behind), and the Intel Xeon E3-1275 v5 at 2043 (0.2% behind). On the other side, the AMD Ryzen 3 3100 scores 2055, which is 0.3% ahead of the E3-1270 v5. The Core i5-1145GRE sits in a similar neighborhood: the Intel Core i5-1130G7 is at 2026 (0.1% ahead), the Intel Xeon E3-1260L v5 and E3-1280 v5 are both at 2029 (0.2% ahead), and the Intel Xeon E3-1240 v5 is at 2030 (0.3% ahead). In other words, both chips trade places with a tight cluster of comparable processors, and the gap between them is smaller than the gap to some of their own nearest rivals.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon E3-1270 v5 wins all six head-to-head benchmarks, so any user choosing strictly on measured compute performance should select it. The margins are small, between 1% and 1.2%, but they are consistent across every test. There is no workload in the recorded data where the Core i5-1145GRE takes the lead.

However, the choice is not purely about benchmark scores. The two processors target different market segments. The Xeon E3-1270 v5 is a Server/Workstation part on the Intel Socket 1151 platform, while the Core i5-1145GRE is a Mobile processor on Intel BGA 1449. The Xeon is end-of-life, whereas the Core i5 is still active in production. The Core i5 also includes integrated graphics (Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU), while the Xeon has no integrated graphics listed in the database.

For a workstation or server builder who needs a socketed processor with ECC memory support and does not require integrated graphics, the Xeon E3-1270 v5 is the better fit. For a mobile system designer who needs integrated graphics, a much lower thermal envelope, and an active production part, the Core i5-1145GRE is the appropriate choice, accepting a roughly 1% performance deficit. Neither chip is meaningfully faster than the other in the benchmark suite; the deciding factors are platform compatibility, power envelope, and feature set.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon E3-1270 v5 wins every benchmark category in the database. In Cinebench R15 multicore, it leads by 1.1%; in R15 singlecore, by 1%; in R20 multicore and singlecore, by 1.2% each; in R23 multicore, by 1.2%; and in R23 singlecore, by 1.1%. It also holds a higher average benchmark score (2048 versus 2025) and a higher percentile ranking (46 versus 45). The Xeon's wins are consistent across both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads, which suggests the performance advantage is not workload-specific but rather a general, if small, edge in CPU compute.

The Core i5-1145GRE does not win any benchmark in the head-to-head comparison. Its wins are elsewhere: it is a Mobile segment chip with a 28 W TDP versus the Xeon's 80 W TDP, it includes integrated graphics, it supports LPDDR4X memory in addition to DDR4, and it uses the newer Tiger Lake architecture on a 10 nm process. The Core i5 also has a higher boost clock (4.10 GHz versus 4.00 GHz), though its base clock is far lower at 1500.00 MHz compared to the Xeon's 3.60 GHz. The Core i5 is an active production part, while the Xeon is end-of-life.

In short, the Xeon wins on measured performance across the board, while the Core i5 wins on platform characteristics: lower power draw, integrated graphics, mobile packaging, and production status.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1270 v5 scores 7082, which is 1.2% ahead of the Core i5-1145GRE's 7001.

Q: Does the Core i5-1145GRE win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. The Xeon E3-1270 v5 wins all six recorded head-to-head tests, with deltas ranging from 1% to 1.2%.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two?

A: The Xeon E3-1270 v5 has an average score of 2048, while the Core i5-1145GRE averages 2025, a gap of about 1.1%.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon E3-1270 v5 and the Intel Core i5-1145GRE are listed with ECC memory support.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core i5-1145GRE includes Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU. The Intel Xeon E3-1270 v5 has no integrated graphics listed in the database.

Q: How do the thermal design power ratings compare?

A: The Xeon E3-1270 v5 has an 80 W TDP, while the Core i5-1145GRE has a 28 W TDP.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations and target different platforms. The Intel Xeon E3-1270 v5 is built on the Skylake architecture, specifically the Skylake-DT codename, and belongs to the Xeon E3 generation. It uses a 14 nm process node with 1,750 million transistors on a 122 mm² die. The Core i5-1145GRE, by contrast, is a Tiger Lake part with the Tiger Lake-U codename, belonging to the Core i5 (Willow Cove-U) generation. It uses a 10 nm process node, and while its transistor count is not recorded, its die size is larger at 144 mm².

The cache layouts differ as well. The Xeon E3-1270 v5 has 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core, with 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core i5-1145GRE has 80 KB of L1 cache per core and a much larger 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, also with 8 MB of shared L3 cache. Total L3 is identical at 8 MB shared for both, but the per-core L1 and L2 figures are notably different, with the Tiger Lake part carrying more cache per core.

Memory support also diverges. The Xeon supports DDR3 and DDR4 with dual-channel memory and a recorded memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. The Core i5 supports DDR4 and LPDDR4X, also dual-channel, with no memory bandwidth figure recorded. Both support ECC memory.

PCIe capabilities differ. The Xeon E3-1270 v5 provides PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The Core i5-1145GRE provides PCIe Gen 4 with 4 lanes (CPU only). That is a significant difference in both generation and lane count.

The integrated graphics situation is a major architectural divergence. The Xeon has no integrated graphics listed, while the Core i5 includes Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU. The market segments reflect this: the Xeon is a Server/Workstation part, and the Core i5 is a Mobile part.

Specification Differences

The two processors share several core specifications: both have 4 cores and 8 threads, both use a dual-channel memory bus, both support ECC memory, and both have 8 MB of shared L3 cache. Neither has an unlocked multiplier. Beyond those points, the specifications diverge in nearly every field.

Clock speeds: the Xeon E3-1270 v5 has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.00 GHz. The Core i5-1145GRE has a base clock of 1500.00 MHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. The Xeon's base clock is far higher, while the Core i5's boost clock is slightly higher.

TDP: the Xeon draws 80 W, while the Core i5 draws 28 W. This is a substantial difference and reflects the Xeon's server/workstation positioning versus the Core i5's mobile focus.

Socket: the Xeon uses Intel Socket 1151, while the Core i5 uses Intel BGA 1449. The former is a socketed platform, the latter is a ball-grid array for mobile integration.

Process node: the Xeon is on 14 nm, the Core i5 on 10 nm. Die size: 122 mm² for the Xeon, 144 mm² for the Core i5. Transistors: 1,750 million for the Xeon, not recorded for the Core i5.

Cache per core: the Xeon has 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core; the Core i5 has 80 KB L1 and 1.25 MB L2 per core. L3 is identical at 8 MB shared.

Memory support: the Xeon supports DDR3 and DDR4; the Core i5 supports DDR4 and LPDDR4X. Memory bandwidth: 34.1 GB/s for the Xeon, not recorded for the Core i5.

PCIe: the Xeon has Gen 3 with 16 lanes; the Core i5 has Gen 4 with 4 lanes.

Integrated graphics: none for the Xeon; Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU for the Core i5.

Market segment: Server/Workstation for the Xeon; Mobile for the Core i5. Production status: end-of-life for the Xeon; active for the Core i5. Release dates: the Xeon launched in 2015, the Core i5 in 2020. Launch MSRP: the Xeon is $339, the Core i5 is $362. Part numbers: SR2LF for the Xeon, SRK10 for the Core i5.