Intel Core i5-11500H vs Intel Xeon E-2288G Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database records eight head-to-head comparisons between the Intel Xeon E-2288G and the Intel Core i5-11500H. The Xeon wins seven of those tests, while the mobile Core i5 takes a single victory. The margins are consistent in one direction, but the one reversal is notable.

In multi-core workloads, the Xeon E-2288G leads across all three Cinebench versions. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 1493 against 1427 for the i5-11500H, a 4.6% advantage. The same 4.6% delta appears in Cinebench R20 multi-core, with scores of 6223 versus 5949. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows the identical pattern: 14817 versus 14166, again 4.6% ahead. This consistency across three rendering tests suggests the Xeon’s advantage is structural, not workload-specific.

Single-core Cinebench results mirror the multi-core picture. The Xeon posts 210 in Cinebench R15 single-core versus 201 for the i5, a 4.5% edge. In R20 single-core, the Xeon scores 878 against 839, a 4.6% gap. R23 single-core shows 2091 versus 1999, again 4.6%. The Xeon’s higher boost clock, recorded at 5.00 GHz versus 4.60 GHz for the i5, likely explains this consistent lead in single-threaded rendering.

Geekbench tells a more complex story. In multi-core, the Xeon wins decisively: 7639 versus 7135, a 7.1% margin. This is the largest multi-core delta in the entire comparison. However, in Geekbench single-core, the i5-11500H flips the result. The i5 scores 1778, while the Xeon manages 1632. That is an 8.2% deficit for the Xeon, the largest swing in either direction across all eight tests.

The data therefore shows a split personality. The Xeon E-2288G is ahead in every Cinebench test, both single and multi-core, and also in Geekbench multi-core. The i5-11500H wins only Geekbench single-core, but by a wider margin than the Xeon’s wins in any other test. For buyers prioritizing Geekbench single-thread performance, the i5 is the clear choice; for everything else in this benchmark set, the Xeon holds the lead.

The Verdict

The benchmark results point to two distinct use cases. The Intel Xeon E-2288G is the stronger processor for multi-threaded workloads, as evidenced by its wins in all three multi-core Cinebench tests and Geekbench multi-core. Its smallest multi-core margin is 4.6% in Cinebench, and its largest is 7.1% in Geekbench. For rendering, compiling, or any task that scales across cores, the Xeon’s 8 cores and 16 threads outperform the i5’s 6 cores and 12 threads by a meaningful margin.

The Intel Core i5-11500H is the better option for single-threaded Geekbench performance. Its 1778 score beats the Xeon’s 1632 by 8.2%, a substantial gap. This suggests that applications heavily dependent on Geekbench-style single-thread operations, such as certain legacy software or specific simulation tools, would run noticeably faster on the i5.

However, the i5’s single-core advantage is limited to Geekbench. In Cinebench single-core tests, the Xeon leads by 4.5% to 4.6% across all three versions. The Xeon also holds a higher percentile rank in the database, sitting at 58 versus 57 for the i5, though this is a narrow difference. The Xeon’s average benchmark score of 4373 exceeds the i5’s 4187 by roughly 4.4%, which aligns with the multi-core deltas observed.

For a workstation or server environment where sustained multi-threaded throughput matters, the Xeon is the data-backed choice. For a mobile platform where Geekbench single-core is the priority, the i5 wins. The i5 also carries a lower launch MSRP of $250, while the Xeon lists at $539, but the database shows no direct price-performance metric, and the Xeon’s higher core count and thread count justify its position in the server segment.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and manufacturing nodes. The Xeon E-2288G uses the Coffee Lake architecture, specifically the Coffee Lake-S WS variant, built on Intel’s 14 nm process. The die measures 180 mm². The i5-11500H uses the Tiger Lake architecture, specifically Tiger Lake-H, on Intel’s 10 nm process, with a die size of 190 mm². The newer 10 nm node gives the i5 a smaller feature size, but the die is slightly larger in area.

Cache layouts differ significantly. The Xeon provides 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, with 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The i5 provides 80 KB of L1 per core and a substantially larger 1.25 MB of L2 per core, but only 12 MB of shared L3. The i5’s larger per-core L2 cache likely contributes to its Geekbench single-core win, as more data can sit closer to the core. The Xeon’s larger shared L3 cache benefits multi-threaded workloads where multiple cores access common data.

Memory support also diverges. Both support DDR4 and dual-channel memory, but the Xeon’s memory bandwidth is recorded at 42.7 GB/s, while the i5 reaches 51.2 GB/s. The i5’s higher bandwidth is notable given its lower core count, suggesting the memory controller in Tiger Lake is more efficient per core. The Xeon supports ECC memory, while the i5 does not, a critical distinction for server and workstation reliability.

PCIe capabilities differ by generation and lane count. The Xeon offers PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU only. The i5 offers PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU only. The i5’s newer PCIe standard doubles the per-lane bandwidth potential, and it provides four additional lanes. Integrated graphics also differ: the Xeon ships with HD Graphics P630, while the i5 includes UHD Graphics 750.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts are the most fundamental difference. The Xeon E-2288G has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the i5-11500H has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Xeon’s base clock is 3.70 GHz, and its boost clock reaches 5.00 GHz. The i5’s base clock is 2.40 GHz, with a boost of 4.60 GHz. The Xeon’s higher clocks across the board explain its Cinebench single-core wins.

Thermal design power differs sharply. The Xeon is rated at 95 W, while the i5 is rated at 35 W. This reflects the Xeon’s desktop workstation positioning versus the i5’s mobile laptop design. The Xeon uses Intel Socket 1151, while the i5 uses Intel BGA 1787, meaning the i5 is soldered to the motherboard and not upgradeable in the traditional sense.

Memory bandwidth, as noted, favors the i5 at 51.2 GB/s versus the Xeon’s 42.7 GB/s. ECC memory support is exclusive to the Xeon. PCIe generation and lanes favor the i5. The Xeon’s market segment is recorded as Server/Workstation, while the i5 is marked Mobile. Production status also differs: the Xeon is end-of-life, while the i5 is active.

Release dates show the Xeon launched on May 28, 2019, and the i5 on May 10, 2021. The Xeon’s part number is SRFB3, and the i5’s is SRKT2. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmarks in the database?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2288G wins 7 of the 8 head-to-head tests. The Intel Core i5-11500H wins only Geekbench single-core.

Q: How large is the Xeon’s multi-core lead?

A: In Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests, the Xeon leads by 4.6% each time. In Geekbench multi-core, the lead is 7.1%.

Q: Where does the i5-11500H beat the Xeon?

A: The i5 wins Geekbench single-core with a score of 1778 versus 1632, an 8.2% advantage. This is the largest delta in any test.

Q: Does the Xeon have more cores?

A: Yes. The Xeon has 8 cores and 16 threads. The i5 has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Xeon E-2288G supports ECC memory. The i5-11500H does not.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth?

A: The i5-11500H has a higher memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s, while the Xeon is rated at 42.7 GB/s.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon E-2288G wins in all multi-threaded rendering scenarios. Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core scores all favor the Xeon by exactly 4.6%. Geekbench multi-core shows an even larger 7.1% gap. Additionally, the Xeon wins all three Cinebench single-core tests, with margins of 4.5% to 4.6%. Its 16 MB shared L3 cache and 8-core configuration make it the pick for workstation rendering, video encoding, and server-side compilation.

The i5-11500H wins only Geekbench single-core, but that win is decisive at 8.2%. Its larger per-core L2 cache (1.25 MB versus 256 KB) and higher memory bandwidth (51.2 GB/s versus 42.7 GB/s) likely contribute to this result. The i5 also offers PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes, versus the Xeon’s PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes, which matters for fast NVMe storage or external GPU connectivity. For a mobile workstation where Geekbench single-thread performance is the primary metric, the i5 is the data-backed option.

The Xeon’s higher TDP of 95 W versus 35 W indicates it is designed for sustained power delivery in a desktop chassis, while the i5 targets battery-conscious laptops. The Xeon’s ECC support and server/workstation market segment further solidify its role in reliability-critical environments. The i5’s active production status and newer 10 nm node suggest longer availability, but the Xeon’s end-of-life status does not diminish its benchmark performance.

In summary, the Xeon wins on raw multi-threaded throughput and Cinebench single-core, while the i5 wins on Geekbench single-core and offers newer PCIe and memory bandwidth specs. The choice depends entirely on which workload mirrors the benchmark tests: rendering favors the Xeon, Geekbench-style single-thread favors the i5.