Intel Core i5-1155G7 vs Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3 and the Intel Core i5-1155G7 occupy opposite ends of the computing spectrum, yet their average benchmark scores place them within 0.4% of each other. The Xeon is an 8-core, 16-thread Haswell-EP server part from 2014, while the Core i5 is a 4-core, 8-thread Tiger Lake-U mobile processor from 2021. Despite this generational and architectural gulf, the data shows a remarkably consistent performance pattern: the Xeon wins every single Cinebench head-to-head comparison, albeit by a narrow margin, while the Core i5 counters with a higher boost clock and integrated graphics. This analysis breaks down where each processor holds an advantage based strictly on the benchmark data.

Where Each One Wins

The performance split between these two CPUs is unambiguous in the provided data. The Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3 wins all six head-to-head Cinebench benchmarks, covering both multi-core and single-core workloads across R15, R20, and R23 versions. Its multi-core advantage ranges from 6.2% to 6.3% across all three Cinebench generations, while its single-core advantage is slightly larger at 6.2% to 7%. This means the Xeon is the clear winner for any CPU-bound rendering task that Cinebench represents, whether that involves all 16 threads or just one.

The Intel Core i5-1155G7, despite losing every head-to-head test, has its own distinct advantages that are not captured in the Cinebench results. The data shows it includes integrated Iris Xe-LP Graphics G7 80EU, which the Xeon completely lacks. For systems that require a display output without a discrete GPU, the Core i5 is the only viable option between the two. Additionally, the Core i5 is an active production part with a 28W TDP and a 4.50 GHz boost clock, while the Xeon is end-of-life with an 85W TDP and a 3.20 GHz boost clock. The Core i5 also supports DDR4 and LPDDR4X memory, whereas the Xeon supports only DDR4; however, the Xeon supports ECC memory while the Core i5 does not. The Core i5 also has a dedicated Geekbench result (4246 multi-core, 1574 single-core) that is not available for the Xeon, showing it is a capable performer in that specific test suite.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two processors is substantial. The Xeon E5-2630 v3 is built on Intel's 22 nm Haswell-EP process, with a die size of 356 mm² and 2,600 million transistors. It features 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.20 GHz. Its cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and a large 20 MB shared L3 cache. The memory subsystem is quad-channel DDR4 with a theoretical bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s, and it supports ECC memory. The platform uses Intel Socket 2011-3 and provides 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes.

The Core i5-1155G7 is built on Intel's 10 nm Tiger Lake-U process, with a significantly smaller die size of 144 mm². It features 4 cores and 8 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a much higher boost clock of 4.50 GHz. Its cache hierarchy is different: 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and only 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The memory subsystem is dual-channel, supporting both DDR4 and LPDDR4X, though no bandwidth figure is provided in the data. It does not support ECC memory. The platform uses Intel BGA 1449 and provides 16 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, a newer standard than the Xeon's Gen 3. The Core i5 also integrates Iris Xe-LP Graphics G7 80EU, which is a major feature differentiator.

The transistor count for the Core i5 is not listed in the data, but the process node difference alone (22 nm vs 10 nm) explains much of the efficiency gap: the Xeon has an 85W TDP versus the Core i5's 28W TDP. The Xeon's 20 MB L3 cache is 2.5 times larger than the Core i5's 8 MB, which helps compensate for its older architecture in server workloads. Conversely, the Core i5's higher boost clock of 4.50 GHz versus 3.20 GHz suggests better single-thread responsiveness, though the benchmark data does not confirm this advantage.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results are remarkably one-sided. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 873 versus the Core i5's 822, a 6.2% advantage. In R15 single-core, the Xeon scores 123 versus 115, a 7% advantage. The pattern continues in Cinebench R20: multi-core scores are 3640 for the Xeon and 3425 for the Core i5 (6.3% delta), while single-core scores are 513 versus 483 (6.2% delta). The newest benchmarks, Cinebench R23, show the same story: multi-core 8668 versus 8155 (6.3% delta) and single-core 1223 versus 1151 (6.3% delta).

These deltas are consistent, but the magnitude is modest. The Xeon's largest win is 7% in R15 single-core, while its smallest is 6.2% in R15 multi-core and R20 single-core. The average benchmark score for the Xeon is 2507, while the Core i5 averages 2496, a difference of 0.4%. This means that in the broader benchmark universe, these CPUs are nearly equivalent, despite the Xeon's clean sweep in Cinebench.

It is worth remembering the Core i5 has additional benchmark data that the Xeon lacks: Geekbench scores of 4246 multi-core and 1574 single-core. This data point suggests the Core i5 is competitive in that test, but since the Xeon has no Geekbench score, no direct comparison is possible. The nearest rivals for the Xeon include the Intel Xeon E5-2643 v3 (avg score 2511, -0.2% delta) and the Intel Xeon E-2144G (avg score 2514, -0.3% delta), which bracket the Xeon's performance. The Core i5's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-9500T (avg score 2493, 0.1% delta) and the Intel Xeon E5-2643 v3 (avg score 2511, -0.6% delta), showing it sits in the same performance band.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core rendering?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3 wins all multi-core Cinebench tests. It scores 873 in R15 multi-core versus 822 for the Core i5-1155G7, 3640 versus 3425 in R20, and 8668 versus 8155 in R23, a consistent 6.2-6.3% advantage.

Q: Does the Core i5-1155G7 win any benchmark?

A: In the provided head-to-head data, no. The Core i5 loses all six Cinebench tests. However, it has a Geekbench result (4246 multi-core, 1574 single-core) that is not available for the Xeon, and it includes integrated Iris Xe-LP Graphics G7 80EU, which the Xeon lacks.

Q: What is the difference in memory support?

A: The Xeon E5-2630 v3 supports DDR4 memory in quad-channel configuration with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth and supports ECC. The Core i5-1155G7 supports DDR4 and LPDDR4X in dual-channel configuration, does not support ECC, and has no bandwidth figure listed.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The Xeon E5-2630 v3 has an 85W TDP, while the Core i5-1155G7 has a 28W TDP. The Xeon is also end-of-life, whereas the Core i5 is an active production part.

Q: What are the socket and platform differences?

A: The Xeon uses Intel Socket 2011-3 with 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, targeting the server/workstation market. The Core i5 uses Intel BGA 1449 with 16 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, targeting the mobile market.

Q: Which has more cache?

A: The Xeon E5-2630 v3 has 20 MB of shared L3 cache, 256 KB L2 per core, and 64 KB L1 per core. The Core i5-1155G7 has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 80 KB L1 per core.

The Verdict

The data directs a clear split based on use case. The Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3 is the superior choice for any workload that mirrors Cinebench rendering, as it wins every head-to-head test by a margin of 6.2% to 7%. Its 8 cores, 16 threads, 20 MB L3 cache, and quad-channel ECC memory support make it the more capable processor for server or workstation environments where multi-threaded throughput and memory reliability are paramount. Its 59.7 GB/s memory bandwidth and 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes further reinforce its server-oriented design. The Xeon also has a higher average benchmark score (2507 versus 2496), placing it at the 49th percentile versus all CPUs, same as the Core i5.

The Intel Core i5-1155G7, despite losing every Cinebench test, is the only viable choice for mobile or compact systems. Its 28W TDP, active production status, and integrated Iris Xe-LP Graphics G7 80EU make it suitable for laptops or mini PCs where power efficiency and integrated graphics are essential. Its support for LPDDR4X memory and PCIe Gen 4 lanes are modern features the Xeon cannot offer. The Core i5's 4.50 GHz boost clock is significantly higher than the Xeon's 3.20 GHz, which may translate to snappier day-to-day responsiveness in lighter tasks, though the Cinebench single-core scores do not reflect this.

For a user building a workstation with a discrete GPU and needing maximum multi-core Cinebench performance, the Xeon E5-2630 v3 is the clear pick from this data. For a user requiring a self-contained mobile system with integrated graphics and low power draw, the Core i5-1155G7 is the only option that meets those requirements. The 0.4% average benchmark score difference between them is negligible in aggregate, but the Xeon's consistent 6%+ lead in rendering workloads and the Core i5's feature set for mobile use make the choice straightforward based on the target platform and workload priorities.