Intel Core i5-11500T vs Intel Xeon E5-1680 v3 Comparison

The Intel Core i5-11500T and the Intel Xeon E5-1680 v3 occupy opposite ends of the platform spectrum, yet their benchmark averages land within a hair of each other. The data shows the 11500T averages 3288 points across its benchmark suite, while the Xeon E5-1680 v3 averages 3265 points, a negligible 0.7% gap that places both at the 53rd percentile of all CPUs tracked. The real story is not the overall average but the structural differences: the 11500T is a 35W, six-core Rocket Lake part with modern integrated graphics, while the Xeon is a 140W, eight-core Haswell-EP workstation chip with ECC memory support. Neither dominates the other in raw compute, but their suitability for specific workloads diverges sharply.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon E5-1680 v3 wins every single head-to-head benchmark recorded in the data, taking all six Cinebench tests. Its largest margin is a 3.9% lead in both Cinebench R15 multicore (1137 vs 1093) and Cinebench R20 multicore (4741 vs 4558), with the same 3.9% edge in Cinebench R23 multicore (11289 vs 10854). In single-core tests, the Xeon leads by 3.7% in R15 (160 vs 154), 3.9% in R20 (669 vs 643), and 3.8% in R23 (1593 vs 1532). This sweep indicates that the Xeon’s two additional physical cores—8 versus the 11500T’s 6—provide a consistent, if modest, advantage across all threaded workloads tested. The Xeon’s higher base clock of 3.20 GHz versus 1.50 GHz also helps sustain throughput in longer rendering tasks, even though its boost clock of 3.80 GHz is only 0.10 GHz lower than the 11500T’s 3.90 GHz.

The 11500T does not win any of the six head-to-head benchmarks, but it wins in areas that no benchmark in this dataset captures. Its 35W TDP is one-quarter of the Xeon’s 140W TDP, making it the clear choice for thermally constrained systems, silent builds, or small-form-factor desktops. The 11500T also offers integrated UHD Graphics 750, whereas the Xeon has no integrated graphics at all, meaning the Xeon requires a discrete GPU for any display output. Additionally, the 11500T supports PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes, while the Xeon is limited to PCIe Gen 3 with 40 lanes—the newer standard matters for fast NVMe storage and current GPUs, even though the Xeon’s lane count is double. The 11500T also has a newer architecture (Rocket Lake, 14 nm) versus the Xeon’s Haswell-EP (22 nm), which explains its lower power draw despite a larger die area per core.

The Verdict

Pick the Xeon E5-1680 v3 if you prioritize raw multi-threaded compute and can accommodate a 140W TDP. The data shows it leads in every Cinebench test by roughly 3.7% to 3.9%, which translates to faster rendering times in CPU-bound workloads like video encoding, 3D modeling, or batch processing. It also offers ECC memory support and quad-channel memory bandwidth (68.3 GB/s versus 51.2 GB/s), which are essential for workstation reliability and memory-intensive tasks. The Xeon’s eight cores and 16 threads, combined with a 20 MB shared L3 cache, make it the stronger choice for sustained all-core loads. Its unlocked multiplier adds flexibility for overclocking, though the 140W TDP already demands a robust cooling solution.

Pick the Core i5-11500T if you need a low-power, modern platform with integrated graphics and current I/O. The 35W TDP allows for compact, quiet systems that the Xeon simply cannot match. The 11500T supports PCIe Gen 4, which enables faster SSDs and newer GPUs, and its UHD Graphics 750 means it can run a display without a discrete card—a feature the Xeon lacks entirely. While it trails the Xeon by about 4% in every Cinebench benchmark, that difference is small enough to be imperceptible in everyday use or lightly threaded applications. The 11500T also has a later release date (2021 versus 2014), meaning better security features and software optimizations for newer instruction sets, though the data does not quantify those advantages.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Xeon E5-1680 v3’s clean sweep of all six Cinebench tests is notable for its consistency. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Xeon scores 1137 against the 11500T’s 1093, a 3.9% lead. The same 3.9% margin appears in Cinebench R20 multicore (4741 vs 4558) and Cinebench R23 multicore (11289 vs 10854). This uniformity suggests the Xeon’s advantage scales with thread count, as its 16 threads outperform the 11500T’s 12 threads by a nearly identical percentage across all three Cinebench versions. The single-core results follow the same pattern: the Xeon leads by 3.7% in R15 (160 vs 154), 3.9% in R20 (669 vs 643), and 3.8% in R23 (1593 vs 1532). The slightly smaller single-core margins in R15 and R23 hint that the 11500T’s newer architecture narrows the gap when fewer cores are active, but the Xeon’s higher base clock (3.20 GHz vs 1.50 GHz) still carries it to victory.

The 11500T’s best performance relative to the Xeon comes in Cinebench R15 single-core, where it trails by only 3.7%. That is its narrowest deficit, and it aligns with the architectural gap: Rocket Lake’s IPC improvements partially offset the Xeon’s clock advantage. However, the Xeon’s boost clock of 3.80 GHz is only 0.10 GHz below the 11500T’s 3.90 GHz, so the Xeon is never at a clock disadvantage in single-threaded bursts. The 11500T’s Geekbench scores—5774 multicore and 1696 single-core—have no direct Xeon equivalent in the dataset, so they cannot be compared head-to-head. Those scores do place the 11500T in the same overall performance tier as the Xeon, with an average benchmark score of 3288 versus 3265, a 0.7% difference that falls within the margin of error for most workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?

A: The Xeon E5-1680 v3 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Core i5-11500T has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Xeon’s two extra cores contribute to its consistent 3.9% lead in multi-threaded Cinebench tests.

Q: Does the Core i5-11500T have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the 11500T includes UHD Graphics 750, allowing display output without a discrete GPU. The Xeon E5-1680 v3 has no integrated graphics, so it requires a separate graphics card for any video output.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The 11500T has a 35W TDP, while the Xeon E5-1680 v3 has a 140W TDP—exactly four times higher. This makes the 11500T far more suitable for low-power or compact systems.

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: The Xeon E5-1680 v3 supports ECC memory, while the 11500T does not. The Xeon also has quad-channel memory support with 68.3 GB/s bandwidth, compared to the 11500T’s dual-channel 51.2 GB/s.

Q: What are the launch dates and MSRPs?

A: The 11500T was released on 2021-03-15 with a launch MSRP of $192. The Xeon E5-1680 v3 was released on 2014-09-07 and has no launch MSRP listed in the data.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The 11500T averages 3288, and the Xeon averages 3265, a 0.7% difference. Both CPUs sit at the 53rd percentile of all CPUs, indicating near-identical overall performance in the aggregated dataset.

Architecture Differences

The two CPUs represent a seven-year generational gap, reflected in their process nodes and core designs. The 11500T uses Intel’s Rocket Lake architecture on a 14 nm process with a 276 mm² die size, while the Xeon E5-1680 v3 uses Haswell-EP on a 22 nm process with a 356 mm² die size and 2,600 million transistors. The newer 14 nm process allows the 11500T to achieve significantly higher power efficiency, as evidenced by its 35W TDP versus the Xeon’s 140W TDP. The Xeon’s larger die and older process explain its higher power draw despite a lower transistor count per area.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The 11500T has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 511 KB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Xeon has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The Xeon’s larger L3 pool (20 MB vs 12 MB) benefits workloads with large working sets, while the 11500T’s larger per-core L1 and L2 caches (80 KB and 511 KB vs 64 KB and 256 KB) improve per-thread performance. Memory support also diverges: the 11500T uses dual-channel DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, while the Xeon uses quad-channel DDR4 with 68.3 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support. The Xeon’s memory bandwidth advantage is 33.4% higher, which can matter for data-heavy workstation tasks.

Platform features separate the two further. The 11500T uses Intel Socket 1200 with PCIe Gen 4 and 20 lanes, while the Xeon uses Intel Socket 2011-3 with PCIe Gen 3 and 40 lanes. The 11500T includes integrated UHD Graphics 750; the Xeon has none. The Xeon has an unlocked multiplier, whereas the 11500T is locked. The 11500T’s base clock is 1.50 GHz with a 3.90 GHz boost, while the Xeon’s base clock is 3.20 GHz with a 3.80 GHz boost—the Xeon is faster at idle and near its boost, but the 11500T has a higher ceiling. The 11500T is classified as a Desktop part, while the Xeon is a Server/Workstation part. Both are end-of-life, but the 11500T’s 2021 release date makes it the more recent design, with the Xeon’s 2014 launch predating it by roughly seven years.