Intel Core i5-3350P vs Intel Xeon E5-1603 v3 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark record splits cleanly in favor of the Intel Xeon E5-1603 v3. Across all six head-to-head Cinebench comparisons, the Xeon takes the win, with no victories recorded for the Core i5-3350P. The margins are consistent but modest, ranging from 3.0% to 3.8% depending on the test. This is not a lopsided generational gap; it is a steady, repeatable edge that shows up in both single-core and multi-core workloads.

The Xeon's largest relative advantage appears in Cinebench R15 single-core, where it scores 54 against the i5's 52, a 3.8% difference. Its smallest lead is in Cinebench R15 multi-core, with 382 versus 371, a 3.0% gap. The other four tests cluster around 3.2% to 3.7%, which suggests the Xeon is not merely benefiting from a particular workload type. Both single-threaded bursts and fully loaded all-core renders favor the server part.

For the Core i5-3350P, there is no benchmark category where it can claim a win. The data records zero wins for this chip against the Xeon. The i5 does have a Geekbench entry in its own benchmark list, but the head-to-head comparison does not include Geekbench tests, so it cannot be used to offset the Cinebench sweep. The recorded picture is a clean 6-0 sweep for the Xeon.

When looking at average benchmark scores across a broader suite, the Xeon E5-1603 v3 averages 1098, while the Core i5-3350P averages 1088. That 10 points difference is roughly 0.9%, smaller than the per-test deltas suggest. This indicates that the Xeon's advantage is stable across Cinebench but does not translate into a dramatic overall average gap. The i5-3350P sits at the 30th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the Xeon sits at the 31st. Both are close to the lower-middle of the performance distribution.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel architectures and sockets. The Xeon E5-1603 v3 is based on Haswell-EP, a 22 nm server and workstation part, packaged for Intel Socket 2011-3. The Core i5-3350P is an Ivy Bridge desktop chip, also built on a 22 nm process, but for Intel Socket 1155. Both use the same transistor count per core for L1 (64 KB per core) and L2 (256 KB per core), but they diverge at the shared L3 cache: the Xeon has 10 MB shared, the i5 has 6 MB shared.

The memory controller is a major split. The Xeon supports DDR4 with a quad-channel bus, yielding a stated memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The i5-3350P supports DDR3 with a dual-channel bus, and no memory bandwidth figure is recorded in the database. ECC memory is enabled on the Xeon, but not on the i5. PCIe connectivity also differs: the Xeon provides Gen 3 with 40 CPU lanes, while the i5 provides Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes.

Die size is another clear distinction. The Xeon's Haswell-EP die measures 356 mm², while the i5's Ivy Bridge die is 133 mm². The Xeon also lists a transistor count of 2,600 million, while the i5 has no recorded transistor figure. The Xeon's larger die and higher lane count are consistent with its server/workstation market segment, compared to the i5's desktop role.

Clock speeds go the other way. The i5-3350P has a base clock of 3.10 GHz and a boost clock of 3.30 GHz. The Xeon has a base clock of 2.80 GHz and no boost clock listed. Higher raw clocks on the i5 do not translate into benchmark wins, as the Xeon's architecture and cache configuration appear to compensate. The Xeon is also marked as end-of-life, and its production status is listed as ended; the i5's production status is not recorded.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher base clock speed?

A: The Intel Core i5-3350P, with a 3.10 GHz base clock. The Intel Xeon E5-1603 v3 has a 2.80 GHz base clock.

Q: How large is the L3 cache difference?

A: The Xeon E5-1603 v3 has 10 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core i5-3350P has 6 MB.

Q: Does either processor support overclocking?

A: No. Both the Xeon E5-1603 v3 and the Core i5-3350P have locked multipliers.

Q: Which socket does the Xeon use?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-1603 v3 uses Intel Socket 2011-3.

Q: What memory type does the Core i5-3350P support?

A: It supports DDR3 memory. The Xeon supports DDR4.

Q: Does the Core i5-3350P support ECC memory?

A: No. ECC memory is supported only on the Intel Xeon E5-1603 v3.

Specification Differences

Socket: Intel Socket 2011-3 (Xeon) vs Intel Socket 1155 (i5-3350P)

Architecture: Haswell-EP (Xeon) vs Ivy Bridge (i5-3350P)

Base clock: 2.80 GHz (Xeon) vs 3.10 GHz (i5-3350P)

Boost clock: None listed (Xeon) vs 3.30 GHz (i5-3350P)

TDP: 140 W (Xeon) vs 69 W (i5-3350P)

L3 cache: 10 MB shared (Xeon) vs 6 MB shared (i5-3350P)

Memory support: DDR4 quad-channel with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth (Xeon) vs DDR3 dual-channel, no bandwidth listed (i5-3350P)

ECC support: Yes (Xeon) vs No (i5-3350P)

PCIe lanes: 40 CPU lanes (Xeon) vs 16 CPU lanes (i5-3350P)

Die size: 356 mm² (Xeon) vs 133 mm² (i5-3350P)

Transistor count: 2,600 million (Xeon) vs not listed (i5-3350P)

Market segment: Server/Workstation (Xeon) vs Desktop (i5-3350P)

Release date: September 2014 (Xeon) vs September 2012 (i5-3350P)

Part number: SR20K (Xeon) vs SR0WS (i5-3350P)

Non-integrated graphics: Neither has integrated graphics.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Xeon E5-1603 v3 wins every recorded head-to-head test. The smallest margin is in Cinebench R15 multi-core: the Xeon scores 382 against the i5's 371, a 3.0% lead. The largest margin is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the Xeon scores 54 versus 52, a 3.8% difference. The other tests follow a tight pattern:

• Cinebench R20 multi-core: Xeon 1595 vs i5 1546, 3.2% lead for Xeon.
• Cinebench R20 single-core: Xeon 225 vs i5 217, 3.7% lead for Xeon.
• Cinebench R23 multi-core: Xeon 3798 vs i5 3681, 3.2% lead for Xeon.
• Cinebench R23 single-core: Xeon 536 vs i5 519, 3.3% lead for Xeon.

These results indicate that the Xeon's advantage is not dependent on thread scaling. The i5-3350P, despite its higher base clock and boost clock, falls behind in both single-thread and multi-thread Cinebench runs. The Xeon's superior memory bandwidth and larger L3 cache likely contribute to its consistent edge, even though its core count and thread count are identical (4 cores, 4 threads for both).

The average benchmark score gap is smaller than any single head-to-head delta. The Xeon averages 1098, the i5 averages 1088. This suggests that in a broader benchmark suite, the i5-3350P can close the gap, but within the Cinebench family, the Xeon has a firmly repeatable lead.

The Verdict

The Intel Xeon E5-1603 v3 is the faster processor in the measured Cinebench workloads. It wins all six head-to-head tests, with margins between 3.0% and 3.7%. The Xeon also has the higher average benchmark score (1098 vs 1088), a larger L3 cache (10 MB vs 6 MB), quad-channel DDR4 memory support with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth, ECC support, and more PCIe lanes (40 vs 16). Anyone running Cinebench or similar rendering workloads should prefer the Xeon based on the recorded data.

The Core i5-3350P, however, has clear advantages in power efficiency and platform simplicity. It draws 69 W under load compared to the Xeon's 140 W, and it uses a lower-cost Socket 1155 platform with dual-channel DDR3. Its base and boost clocks are higher (3.10 GHz base, 3.30 GHz boost vs 2.80 GHz no boost), but this does not translate into any benchmark win.

For a desktop user who values low power and does not need server features like ECC or quad-channel memory, the i5-3350P may be the more sensible choice, but the data does not show any performance benefit. For a workstation or server build where memory bandwidth, ECC, and PCIe lanes matter, the Xeon E5-1603 v3 is the clear pick. The 6-0 sweep in head-to-head tests is the deciding factor.