Intel Core i5-11600T vs Intel Xeon E5-2658A v3 Comparison

The Intel Core i5-11600T and Intel Xeon E5-2658A v3 sit at opposite ends of Intel's product stack: one is a low-power desktop chip, the other a server/workstation processor. In the database's head-to-head Cinebench tests, the Xeon wins every round, but the margins are slim, never exceeding 2.1%. The i5 counters with a higher average benchmark score and integrated graphics, making the choice less obvious than a simple win count suggests.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records six Cinebench comparisons, and the Xeon E5-2658A v3 takes all six. The largest leads come in Cinebench R20 multi-core, R23 multi-core, and R23 single-core, where the Xeon is 2.1% ahead. In R20 multi-core, the Xeon scores 5311 against the i5's 5201. In R23 multi-core, the Xeon posts 12647 versus 12385. In R23 single-core, the Xeon reaches 1785 while the i5 manages 1748. The smallest margin is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the Xeon leads by 1.7% (179 versus 176). The remaining tests, R15 multi-core and R20 single-core, show a 2% gap: 1274 against 1248, and 749 against 734, respectively.

These results are notable because the i5 has a much higher boost clock, 4.10 GHz versus the Xeon's 2.90 GHz. Yet the Xeon's 12 cores and 24 threads, double the i5's 6 cores and 12 threads, overcome that clock disadvantage in every Cinebench workload. The margins are consistent, suggesting the Xeon's extra cores provide a steady, if modest, multi-threaded advantage, while its single-core performance is close enough to the i5's that the higher clock does not translate into a win.

The i5 does have a higher average benchmark score overall: 3742 versus the Xeon's 3658. That gap comes from the i5's Geekbench results, which are recorded in the database (multi-core 6653, single-core 1791), while the Xeon has no Geekbench entries. So while the Xeon dominates the Cinebench suite, the i5's broader benchmark coverage gives it a higher aggregate score.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2658A v3 has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core i5-11600T has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: Which CPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The Core i5-11600T boosts to 4.10 GHz, while the Xeon E5-2658A v3 boosts to 2.90 GHz.

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: The Xeon E5-2658A v3 supports ECC memory, while the Core i5-11600T does not.

Q: Which CPU has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Xeon E5-2658A v3 offers 68.3 GB/s over a quad-channel DDR4 bus, while the Core i5-11600T provides 51.2 GB/s over a dual-channel bus.

Q: Which CPU includes integrated graphics?

A: The Core i5-11600T includes UHD Graphics 750, while the Xeon E5-2658A v3 has no integrated graphics.

Q: Which CPU wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Xeon E5-2658A v3 scores 12647 versus 12385 for the Core i5-11600T, a 2.1% lead.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split. The Xeon E5-2658A v3 is the stronger multi-threaded performer in the Cinebench suite, winning all six tests by margins between 1.7% and 2.1%. It also brings server-class features: ECC memory support, a quad-channel memory bus, 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, and a 30 MB shared L3 cache. For workloads that rely on many cores, high memory bandwidth, or error-correcting memory, the Xeon is the appropriate choice.

The Core i5-11600T, on the other hand, has a higher boost clock, a lower 35 W TDP, integrated UHD Graphics 750, and a higher average benchmark score thanks to its Geekbench results. It also uses a newer architecture (Rocket Lake) and a smaller 14 nm process, which contributes to its efficiency. For a desktop system that needs integrated graphics, low power draw, and strong single-threaded performance, the i5 is the better fit.

Neither chip is a clear winner across all metrics. The Xeon wins every Cinebench test, but the i5 wins on aggregate score and offers features the Xeon lacks. The decision hinges on whether the workload prioritizes core count and ECC or clock speed and integrated graphics.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Core i5-11600T | Intel Xeon E5-2658A v3 |

|-------|----------------------|------------------------|

| Cores | 6 | 12 |

| Threads | 12 | 24 |

| Base clock | 1700 MHz | 2200 MHz |

| Boost clock | 4100 MHz | 2900 MHz |

| TDP | 35 W | 105 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1200 | Intel Socket 2011-3 |

| Process node | 14 nm | 22 nm |

| Die size | 276 mm² | 356 mm² |

| L1 cache | 80 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |

| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 256 KB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 12 MB (shared) | 30 MB (shared) |

| Memory bus | Dual-channel | Quad-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | 68.3 GB/s |

| ECC memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 lanes | Gen 3, 40 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | UHD Graphics 750 | None |

| Market segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

| Release date | 2021-03-15 | Not recorded |

| Launch MSRP | $213 | $1832 |

| Part number | SRKNX | SR27T |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 2,600 million |

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations. The Core i5-11600T is built on Rocket Lake, a 14 nm design, while the Xeon E5-2658A v3 uses Haswell-EP on a 22 nm process. The i5's die is smaller at 276 mm², while the Xeon's die measures 356 mm² and contains 2,600 million transistors; the i5's transistor count is not recorded in the database.

Core and cache layouts differ substantially. The i5 has 6 cores and 12 threads, with 80 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 per core, plus a 12 MB shared L3. The Xeon doubles the core count to 12 and threads to 24, but uses smaller per-core caches: 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2. Its L3 is much larger at 30 MB shared, which helps compensate for the smaller per-core caches in multi-threaded workloads.

Memory support also diverges. The i5 uses dual-channel DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC. The Xeon uses quad-channel DDR4 with 68.3 GB/s bandwidth and supports ECC. The Xeon also provides 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, while the i5 offers 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes. The i5 includes integrated UHD Graphics 750; the Xeon has no integrated graphics, reflecting its server/workstation role.

The architectural gap is significant: Rocket Lake is a newer design with higher clock potential and a more efficient process, while Haswell-EP is an older, larger node with more cores and server-oriented features. The benchmark results show that the Xeon's extra cores and memory bandwidth give it a slight edge in Cinebench, but the i5's higher clocks and newer architecture keep the margins very close.