Intel Core i5-1350P vs Intel Xeon W-1290E Comparison

# Intel Core i5-1350P vs Intel Xeon W-1290E

The Intel Core i5-1350P and Intel Xeon W-1290E are near-identical in benchmark results, with the mobile Raptor Lake chip edging the workstation Comet Lake part by a hair in every tested workload. The average benchmark score for the i5-1350P is 4776, while the Xeon W-1290E sits at 4775, a delta of 0% between them. Both processors land in the 59th percentile of all CPUs tracked, placing them in the same performance tier despite their radically different designs, sockets, and market segments. The i5-1350P wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, but the largest margin is a mere 0.1% in Cinebench R20 single-core — a statistical tie in practical terms. The real differentiators are not raw scores but platform characteristics: the i5-1350P is a 28W mobile processor on Intel BGA 1744, while the Xeon W-1290E is a 95W server/workstation chip on Intel Socket 1200 with ECC memory support.

The Verdict

Choose the Intel Core i5-1350P if your priority is a compact, low-power platform with modern connectivity. The data shows a 12-core, 16-thread Raptor Lake-P design on a 10nm process, with a 28W TDP that makes it suitable for thin-and-light notebooks. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, offers PCIe Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes, and includes Iris Xe Graphics with 80 execution units. Its integrated graphics are significantly more capable than the Xeon's UHD Graphics P630, which matters for systems without a discrete GPU. The i5-1350P also has a higher L2 cache per core at 2MB versus the Xeon's 256KB, and its 4.70 GHz boost clock trails the Xeon's 4.80 GHz by a small margin.

Choose the Intel Xeon W-1290E if your workload demands ECC memory reliability and a larger shared cache. This 10-core, 20-thread Comet Lake processor on a 14nm node provides 20MB of shared L3 cache, compared to the i5-1350P's 12MB. It has a 3.50 GHz base clock versus the i5's 1.90 GHz, which means sustained all-core performance at lower clocks is less dependent on boost behavior. The Xeon supports only DDR4 memory (dual-channel, 46.9 GB/s bandwidth) but includes ECC memory support — a feature absent on the i5-1350P. Its 95W TDP and Socket 1200 form factor target workstation builds where power efficiency is secondary to stability and data integrity.

For most users, the i5-1350P's combination of newer architecture, lower power draw, and faster integrated graphics makes it the more versatile choice. The Xeon W-1290E justifies itself only in ECC-required environments or where the 20MB L3 cache provides a measurable advantage in cache-sensitive server workloads. Since their benchmark scores are effectively identical — the i5 leads by 4 points in Cinebench R23 multi-core (16514 vs 16510) — the decision rests entirely on platform needs rather than performance.

Where Each One Wins

The i5-1350P wins all six Cinebench tests, but the margins are negligible. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, both score exactly 1664; in R15 single-core, both score exactly 234. The R20 multi-core test shows 6935 for the i5 versus 6934 for the Xeon, and R20 single-core is 979 versus 978, a 0.1% difference. R23 multi-core is 16514 versus 16510, and R23 single-core is 2331 versus 2330. These deltas are within run-to-run variance for any benchmark, meaning the processors are functionally tied in compute performance.

The Xeon W-1290E wins on platform features that don't appear in Cinebench scores. Its 20MB shared L3 cache is 67% larger than the i5's 12MB, which can reduce memory traffic in workloads with large working sets. ECC memory support is a binary feature — either you need it or you don't — and the Xeon has it while the i5 does not. The Xeon's 3.50 GHz base clock is substantially higher than the i5's 1.90 GHz, so under sustained all-core loads where boost clocks cannot be maintained, the Xeon may sustain higher throughput. However, its 95W TDP means it consumes over three times the power of the i5's 28W TDP.

The i5-1350P wins decisively on platform modernity. PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes versus the Xeon's PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes doubles the per-lane bandwidth for NVMe storage and GPUs. DDR5 memory support alongside DDR4 gives future-proofing options. The 10nm process versus 14nm delivers better efficiency per watt. Iris Xe Graphics with 80 EUs is far more capable than UHD Graphics P630 for light gaming, video playback, and GPU-accelerated encoding. The i5 also has a smaller die footprint — the Xeon's die size is listed at 206 mm², while the i5's is not provided — though both are built by Intel.

Architecture Differences

The i5-1350P uses Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-P variant, on a 10nm Intel process. It packs 12 cores and 16 threads, indicating a hybrid design with performance and efficiency cores (though the FACT PACK does not specify the core mix). Its cache hierarchy includes 80KB L1 per core, 2MB L2 per core, and 12MB shared L3. The base clock is 1.90 GHz with a 4.70 GHz boost. The socket is Intel BGA 1744, meaning it is soldered to the motherboard — not upgradeable. It launched on 2023-01-03 with a launch MSRP of $320.

The Xeon W-1290E uses Comet Lake architecture on a 14nm process, with 10 cores and 20 threads — all performance cores with Hyper-Threading. Cache is 64KB L1 per core, 256KB L2 per core, and 20MB shared L3. Base clock is 3.50 GHz, boost is 4.80 GHz. The socket is Intel Socket 1200, which allows for socketed installation and potential replacement. It launched on 2020-05-12 with a launch MSRP of $552. The die size is 206 mm². ECC memory is supported, and the memory controller is dual-channel DDR4 with 46.9 GB/s bandwidth. PCIe is Gen 3 with 16 lanes.

The memory support difference is notable: the i5 accepts both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Xeon is DDR4-only. The i5 has no listed memory bandwidth figure, whereas the Xeon's is 46.9 GB/s. Both use dual-channel memory buses. The i5's integrated graphics is Iris Xe Graphics with 80 execution units; the Xeon's is Intel UHD Graphics P630. Neither has an unlocked multiplier. The i5's part number is SRMJ5; the Xeon's is SRJFB. Both are listed as Active in production status.

FAQ

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

A: The i5-1350P leads by a razor-thin margin. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 16514 versus the Xeon's 16510, a 0% delta. In R20 multi-core, the i5 scores 6935 versus 6934. In R15 multi-core, both score exactly 1664. The i5 wins all three tests, but the differences are within measurement noise.

Q: Does the Xeon W-1290E support ECC memory?

A: Yes. The Xeon W-1290E explicitly supports ECC memory, with a dual-channel DDR4 memory bus and 46.9 GB/s bandwidth. The i5-1350P does not support ECC memory, though it does support both DDR4 and DDR5.

Q: What are the power consumption differences?

A: The i5-1350P has a 28W TDP, while the Xeon W-1290E has a 95W TDP. This makes the i5 more than three times as power-efficient on paper, which is significant for mobile or small-form-factor systems. The Xeon's higher TDP reflects its higher base clock of 3.50 GHz versus the i5's 1.90 GHz.

Q: Which has better integrated graphics?

A: The i5-1350P features Iris Xe Graphics with 80 execution units, while the Xeon W-1290E has Intel UHD Graphics P630. The i5's integrated GPU is substantially more capable, though the FACT PACK does not provide specific graphics benchmark scores for either.

Q: Are these processors interchangeable in the same motherboard?

A: No. The i5-1350P uses Intel BGA 1744, a soldered mobile socket, while the Xeon W-1290E uses Intel Socket 1200, a desktop/workstation socket. They are physically incompatible and target entirely different platforms.

Q: Why do the benchmark scores look nearly identical despite different core counts?

A: The i5-1350P has 12 cores and 16 threads on a 10nm Raptor Lake design, while the Xeon W-1290E has 10 cores and 20 threads on a 14nm Comet Lake design. Despite the Xeon having more threads and a higher boost clock (4.80 GHz versus 4.70 GHz), the i5's newer architecture and larger per-core L2 cache (2MB versus 256KB) compensate. The result is a 0% average score delta across all Cinebench tests.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The six Cinebench results tell a story of parity. Starting with Cinebench R15 multi-core, both processors score exactly 1664 — a perfect tie, with the i5-1350P listed as the winner due to a 0% delta. The single-core R15 test also produces identical scores of 234 for both. These are the oldest tests in the suite and show that even with a two-year architecture gap, the raw compute capability is indistinguishable.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the i5-1350P scores 6935 in multi-core versus the Xeon's 6934, a difference of one point. In single-core, the i5 scores 979 versus 978, representing a 0.1% delta — the largest margin in the entire comparison. This pattern continues in Cinebench R23, where the i5 scores 16514 multi-core and 2331 single-core, against the Xeon's 16510 and 2330 respectively. The i5 wins all six tests, but no test shows more than a 0.1% advantage.

These results indicate that the architectural differences — 10nm versus 14nm, 12 cores versus 10, 16 threads versus 20, 12MB L3 versus 20MB — effectively cancel out in Cinebench's rendering workloads. The i5's higher IPC from Raptor Lake offsets the Xeon's higher core count and clock speed. The Xeon's larger L3 cache does not translate into a Cinebench advantage, likely because the benchmark's working set fits within both cache sizes.

For system builders, the takeaway is that CPU performance should not be the deciding factor between these two. The i5-1350P offers the same compute throughput at a fraction of the power envelope, with newer PCIe and memory support. The Xeon W-1290E offers ECC and a socketed form factor. In any application that relies purely on Cinebench-style multi-threaded rendering, users will see no practical difference — the data shows a 0% delta in average score, with both processors sitting at the 59th percentile of all CPUs.