Intel Core i5-1335UE vs Intel Xeon E5-1650 v4 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E5-1650 v4 and Intel Core i5-1335UE represent two very different eras of Intel design, and the benchmark data reflects a clear, consistent outcome. Across every single Cinebench test recorded, the Core i5-1335UE emerges victorious. The margin is uniform, with the i5-1335UE leading by 4.2% to 4.6% in every workload. While the Xeon E5-1650 v4 posts a higher average benchmark score overall (2978 vs. 2907), this is due to the inclusion of Geekbench results for the Xeon, which are not present for the Core i5. In the head-to-head Cinebench comparisons, the newer mobile chip wins all six contests, making it the definitive choice for these specific render tests.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i5-1335UE wins every head-to-head benchmark in the pack. Starting with multi-core performance, the i5-1335UE scores 1013 in Cinebench R15 multicore, a 4.6% advantage over the Xeon's 966. This pattern holds in Cinebench R20 multicore, where the i5-1335UE posts 4221 versus the Xeon's 4028, again a 4.6% gap. The most demanding test, Cinebench R23 multicore, shows the i5-1335UE scoring 10052 to the Xeon's 9592, a 4.6% difference. This consistency suggests a fundamental architectural efficiency advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

Single-core performance tells the same story, though with slightly tighter margins. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the i5-1335UE scores 142 against the Xeon's 136, a 4.2% lead. The Cinebench R20 single-core test shows the i5-1335UE at 595 versus the Xeon's 568, a 4.5% advantage. Finally, Cinebench R23 single-core has the i5-1335UE scoring 1419 against the Xeon's 1354, a 4.6% lead. The narrowest margin is the 4.2% in R15 single-core, but even that is a decisive win for the newer part.

It is importantly the Xeon E5-1650 v4's average benchmark score of 2978 places it slightly ahead of the Core i5-1335UE's 2907. However, this metric is skewed by the Geekbench results available only for the Xeon (6060 multi-core, 1122 single-core). When comparing only the shared Cinebench workloads, the Core i5-1335UE is consistently faster. The Xeon's percentile rank of 52 versus the i5-1335UE's 51 also reflects this mixed picture, with the Xeon sitting just one percentile higher across all CPUs despite losing every direct comparison.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Core i5-1335UE is faster, scoring 10052 compared to the Intel Xeon E5-1650 v4's 9592. This represents a 4.6% performance advantage for the Core i5.

Q: Does the Xeon E5-1650 v4 win any benchmark in the head-to-head data?

A: No. The Core i5-1335UE wins all six recorded head-to-head benchmarks, which include Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core tests. The Xeon has zero wins.

Q: How do their overall average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Xeon E5-1650 v4 has a higher average benchmark score of 2978, while the Core i5-1335UE scores 2907. This places the Xeon at the 52nd percentile and the Core i5 at the 51st percentile of all CPUs.

Q: What is the closest rival to the Xeon E5-1650 v4?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 5675U and Intel Xeon E-2334 are its closest rivals, both with an average score of 2988, a delta of -0.3% from the Xeon's score.

Q: What is the closest rival to the Core i5-1335UE?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1600 is the closest rival, with an average score of 2909, a delta of -0.1% from the Core i5's score. The Intel Xeon E-2414 is nearly identical at 2905, a delta of 0.1%.

Q: Is the single-core performance gap larger or smaller than the multi-core gap?

A: The single-core gaps are slightly smaller. The multi-core differences are consistently 4.6% across R15, R20, and R23. The single-core differences range from 4.2% to 4.6%, with the R15 test showing the smallest margin.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two processors is vast. The Xeon E5-1650 v4 is built on the 14 nm Broadwell-EP process, a 2016-era design. It relies on a monolithic 6-core, 12-thread configuration with a 3,400 million transistor count and a 246 mm² die size. The Core i5-1335UE, in contrast, is a 10 nm Raptor Lake-U part from 2023, using a hybrid architecture with 10 cores and 12 threads. Its process node is significantly more advanced, though Intel does not list its transistor count or die size in the data.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The Xeon provides 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, with 15 MB of shared L3. The Core i5 offers a larger 80 KB of L1 and a much larger 1.25 MB of L2 per core, but its shared L3 is smaller at 12 MB. The i5-1335UE's larger per-core L2 is typical of newer designs that rely on faster, closer cache to boost single-thread performance.

Memory and I/O are also fundamentally different. The Xeon supports DDR4 across a quad-channel bus, yielding a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, and includes ECC memory support. The Core i5 supports both DDR4 and DDR5 but runs on a dual-channel bus, with no memory bandwidth figure provided and no ECC support. PCIe connectivity also diverges: the Xeon has Gen 3 with 40 CPU lanes, while the Core i5 has Gen 4 with only 8 CPU lanes. The Core i5 does include integrated Iris Xe Graphics with 80 execution units, whereas the Xeon has no integrated graphics.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every core specification. The Xeon E5-1650 v4 has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Core i5-1335UE has 10 cores and 12 threads. Base clock speeds are drastically different: the Xeon runs at 3.60 GHz, while the Core i5 has a base clock listed at 1300.00 MHz (1.30 GHz), reflecting its low-power mobile design. The boost clocks are closer, with the Xeon at 4.00 GHz and the Core i5 at 4.50 GHz.

Thermal design power is a stark contrast. The Xeon is a desktop part with a 140 W TDP, while the Core i5 is a mobile part rated at just 15 W. This 125 W difference explains the massive gap in cooling requirements and power delivery needs. The sockets are incompatible: the Xeon uses Intel Socket 2011-3, while the Core i5 uses Intel BGA 1744, meaning the Core i5 is soldered to the motherboard.

The production status and release dates differ as well. The Xeon was released in June 2016 and is end-of-life, while the Core i5 was released in January 2023 and is still active. The Xeon has a launch MSRP of $621, while the Core i5 has no listed launch MSRP. Other differences include the Xeon's 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes versus the Core i5's 8 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, and the Xeon's support for ECC memory versus the Core i5's lack thereof. The Xeon also has a listed part number (SR2P7), while the Core i5 does not.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear choice for different use cases. For anyone running Cinebench workloads, the Intel Core i5-1335UE is the better performer, winning every single benchmark by a margin of 4.2% to 4.6%. Its 10 cores and 12 threads, combined with a higher boost clock of 4.50 GHz, deliver superior multi-threaded and single-threaded render scores despite a dramatically lower 15 W TDP. The i5-1335UE is the obvious pick for mobile or power-constrained systems where performance per watt is a priority.

The Intel Xeon E5-1650 v4, while losing every head-to-head test, still holds its own in the broader market. Its average benchmark score of 2978 is higher than the Core i5's 2907, and it sits at the 52nd percentile versus the i5's 51st. This suggests that in applications outside the Cinebench suite—such as those measured by Geekbench, where the Xeon scores 6060 multi-core and 1122 single-core—the Xeon can be competitive or even superior. The Xeon also offers quad-channel DDR4 memory with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth, ECC support, and 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, making it far more suitable for server or workstation tasks requiring high memory throughput and extensive I/O.

The verdict depends entirely on the workload. If the task is pure CPU rendering as measured by Cinebench, the Core i5-1335UE wins decisively. If the task involves memory bandwidth, ECC reliability, or the need for a desktop platform with extensive PCIe connectivity, the Xeon E5-1650 v4 remains a viable, if aging, option. The Xeon's end-of-life status and 2016 release date are also critical factors; the Core i5 is an active product with a newer architecture. For most modern workloads, especially those that benefit from higher single-thread performance, the Core i5-1335UE is the recommended choice based on the benchmark data.