Intel Core i5-1240P vs Intel Xeon E5-2650 v4 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E5-2650 v4 and Intel Core i5-1240P represent two very different design philosophies from Intel, separated by six years of architectural evolution. The Xeon is a 2016 server/workstation part built on Broadwell-EP, while the i5 is a 2022 mobile processor using Alder Lake-P. The benchmark data shows a generational shift: the i5-1240P wins five of six head-to-head Cinebench tests, yet the Xeon claims a decisive victory in the Cinebench R23 multi-core test, a result that underscores how workload scaling can flip expected outcomes.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i5-1240P holds a higher average benchmark score of 3202, compared to the Intel Xeon E5-2650 v4’s 3154. Both processors sit at the 53rd percentile among all CPUs, indicating they are statistically equivalent in overall standing despite the raw score difference.

Q: How large is the single-core performance gap in Cinebench R20?

A: The i5-1240P scores 795 in Cinebench R20 single-core, which is 18.7% ahead of the Xeon’s 646. This gap is consistent with the 31.4% lead the i5 shows in Cinebench R15 single-core (226 vs 155).

Q: Does the Xeon ever beat the i5 in any benchmark?

A: Yes, the Xeon E5-2650 v4 wins the Cinebench R23 multi-core test with a score of 10904, which is 16.1% higher than the i5-1240P’s 9392. This is the only head-to-head victory for the Xeon out of six tests.

Q: What is the difference in thread count between the two chips?

A: The Xeon offers 24 threads across 12 cores, while the i5 provides 16 threads across 12 cores. The i5 uses a hybrid architecture with performance and efficiency cores, whereas the Xeon uses 12 homogeneous cores.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2650 v4 supports ECC memory, a critical feature for server and workstation reliability. The Intel Core i5-1240P does not support ECC memory.

Q: What are the memory channel configurations?

A: The Xeon uses a quad-channel DDR4 memory bus with 68.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The i5 uses a dual-channel bus supporting both DDR4 and DDR5, though its bandwidth figure is not provided in the data.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two CPUs is stark. The Xeon E5-2650 v4 is built on Intel’s 14 nm Broadwell-EP process, packing 3,400 million transistors into a 246 mm² die. It features 12 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 2.90 GHz. Its cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and a substantial 30 MB of shared L3 cache. This is a server-grade part designed for sustained multi-threaded throughput, with a TDP of 105 W and a socket of Intel Socket 2011-3.

In contrast, the i5-1240P is a mobile processor on Intel’s 10 nm Alder Lake-P process, with a die size of 217 mm². It also has 12 cores but only 16 threads, reflecting the hybrid P-core/E-core design. Its base clock is listed at 1700.00 MHz (likely representing the efficiency core base), while its boost clock reaches 4.40 GHz. The cache layout is different: 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The TDP is dramatically lower at 28 W, and it uses a BGA 1744 socket. The i5 includes integrated Iris Xe 80EU graphics, whereas the Xeon has no integrated graphics.

The memory subsystems also diverge. The Xeon supports quad-channel DDR4 with 68.3 GB/s bandwidth and ECC memory, while the i5 supports dual-channel DDR4 and DDR5 without ECC. PCIe connectivity differs as well: the Xeon offers Gen 3 with 40 lanes (CPU only), while the i5 offers Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The production statuses reflect their lifecycles: the Xeon is end-of-life, while the i5 is active.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results tell a consistent story of generational IPC gains, with one notable exception. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i5-1240P scores 1566.5 against the Xeon’s 1098, a 29.9% advantage. This is remarkable given that both chips have 12 cores, but the i5’s higher clocks and newer architecture deliver far more throughput per thread. The single-core R15 test shows an even larger gap: the i5 scores 226 versus the Xeon’s 155, a 31.4% lead, highlighting the massive IPC improvement from Broadwell to Alder Lake.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the i5 maintains its dominance. In multi-core, it scores 5632 versus the Xeon’s 4579, an 18.7% margin. In single-core, the i5’s 795 beats the Xeon’s 646 by the same 18.7%. These results indicate that the i5’s advantages are not just in single-threaded workloads; it also scales well across multiple cores, despite having fewer threads (16 vs 24).

The Cinebench R23 results, however, flip the script. In multi-core, the Xeon E5-2650 v4 achieves 10904, which is 16.1% higher than the i5-1240P’s 9392. This is the Xeon’s only win, and it is substantial. The likely explanation lies in the Xeon’s 24 threads versus the i5’s 16, combined with the Xeon’s larger 30 MB L3 cache. In a workload like Cinebench R23 multi-core, which can utilize all available threads, the Xeon’s extra 8 threads provide enough parallel throughput to overcome the i5’s per-core efficiency. Yet in single-core R23, the i5 still wins, scoring 1600 versus the Xeon’s 1539, a 3.8% margin.

The wins tally is lopsided: the i5 takes 5 of 6 tests, with the Xeon taking only R23 multi-core. The average benchmark scores reflect this overall trend, with the i5 at 3202 and the Xeon at 3154. The nearest rivals for each chip are informative: the Xeon’s closest competitor is the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5850U (deltaPct -0.2), while the i5’s closest is the Intel Core i3-13100T (deltaPct 0.1). This suggests that despite their age difference, both chips occupy similar performance tiers in the broader CPU landscape.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split based on workload type and platform requirements. The Intel Core i5-1240P is the superior processor for the vast majority of tasks, particularly those that are latency-sensitive or lightly threaded. Its single-core performance leads by 18.7-31.4% across the Cinebench suite, and it wins multi-core tests in R15 and R20 by 18.7-29.9%. The i5 also offers integrated graphics, a lower 28 W TDP suited for mobile systems, and support for both DDR4 and DDR5 memory. For general computing, content creation, and even many multi-threaded applications, the i5 is the better choice.

However, the Intel Xeon E5-2650 v4 has a specific niche where it excels: heavily parallel, sustained workloads that can exploit its 24 threads. The 16.1% victory in Cinebench R23 multi-core is not trivial, and combined with ECC memory support and quad-channel bandwidth, the Xeon remains relevant for server or workstation environments where data integrity and memory throughput are paramount. Its end-of-life status and 105 W TDP are drawbacks, but the raw multi-threaded capability is still competitive.

Users should pick the i5-1240P if they need a modern, efficient processor with strong single-core performance and flexibility in memory choices, or if they require integrated graphics. The Xeon E5-2650 v4 is the choice for those building a server or workstation where 24 threads, ECC memory, and quad-channel bandwidth are non-negotiable, and where the R23 multi-core result is a better proxy for the actual workload. The benchmark data does not lie: the i5 wins most battles, but the Xeon wins the war of pure thread scaling.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon E5-2650 v4 | Intel Core i5-1240P |

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

| Cores | 12 | 12 |

| Threads | 24 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 2.20 GHz | 1700.00 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2.90 GHz | 4.40 GHz |

| TDP | 105 W | 28 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 | Intel BGA 1744 |

| Architecture | Broadwell | Alder Lake |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 10 nm |

| Transistors | 3,400 million | Not specified |

| Die Size | 246 mm² | 217 mm² |

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

| L2 Cache | 256 KB (per core) | 1.25 MB (per core) |

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

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Quad-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 68.3 GB/s | Not specified |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 40 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | None | Iris Xe 80EU |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2016-03-15 | 2022-02-22 |

| Launch MSRP | $1166 | Not specified |

| Part Number | SR2N3 | SRLD9 |