Intel Core i5-3470 vs Intel Xeon W-2195 Comparison

Intel Core i5-3470 and Intel Xeon W-2195 sit at opposite ends of Intel’s product stack, separated by five years, 14 cores, and a massive gulf in platform ambition. The benchmark data confirms a complete sweep: the Xeon W-2195 wins all six head-to-head tests, with every single result showing an 83.4% delta in its favor. Yet the two processors share the exact same percentile rank against all CPUs (63rd), and their average benchmark scores are nearly identical — 6906 for the i5-3470 versus 6892 for the Xeon W-2195. That paradox — a total benchmark rout paired with statistical parity in aggregate — defines this comparison. The i5-3470 is a 2012 quad-core desktop part; the Xeon W-2195 is a 2017 18-core workstation monster. One is a relic of the Ivy Bridge era, the other a Skylake-W server chip, and the data shows what happens when sheer core count meets aging single-thread performance.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon W-2195 wins everywhere the benchmark suite measures compute throughput. In Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, it dominates both multi-core and single-core tests. The multi-core margins are staggering: 2401 versus 398 in R15, 10007 versus 1661 in R20, and 23828 versus 3957 in R23. Each of those represents the same 83.4% advantage — meaning the Xeon’s score is roughly six times higher across every Cinebench iteration. That is not a marginal lead; it is a categorical difference in rendering and content-creation workloads.

The single-core Cinebench results tell a more nuanced story. The Xeon W-2195 still wins — 338 versus 56 in R15, 1412 versus 234 in R20, 3363 versus 558 in R23 — but the delta remains exactly 83.4%. This is notable because the i5-3470 boosts to 3.60 GHz while the Xeon’s boost clock is 4.30 GHz. Despite the i5’s higher base clock of 3.20 GHz versus 2.30 GHz, the Xeon’s newer architecture and higher boost clock deliver a six-fold advantage even in single-threaded tests. The data shows no scenario where the i5-3470 takes a win. For users running heavily threaded workloads — video rendering, 3D simulation, scientific computing — the Xeon W-2195 is the only rational choice. For legacy applications that rely on modest single-thread performance, the i5-3470’s 63rd percentile rank suggests it remains serviceable, but it cannot compete in any benchmark category represented here.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two CPUs is generational and physical. The i5-3470 uses Intel’s Ivy Bridge architecture on a 22 nm process node, packing 1,400 million transistors into a 160 mm² die. The Xeon W-2195 uses Skylake-W on a 14 nm node, with a much larger 484 mm² die. The transistor count for the Xeon is not listed, but the die size difference alone — 484 mm² versus 160 mm² — indicates a far more complex chip. The i5-3470 has 4 cores and 4 threads; the Xeon W-2195 has 18 cores and 36 threads. That is a 4.5× core advantage and a 9× thread advantage.

Cache hierarchies diverge sharply. Both share a 64 KB L1 cache per core, but the L2 cache jumps from 256 KB per core on the i5-3470 to 1 MB per core on the Xeon W-2195. The L3 cache scales from 6 MB shared on the i5 to 24.75 MB shared on the Xeon — a 4.1× increase. Memory support follows the same pattern: the i5 uses DDR3 with dual-channel memory and 25.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the Xeon uses DDR4 with quad-channel memory and 85.3 GB/s bandwidth. The Xeon also supports ECC memory; the i5 does not. PCIe lanes go from 16 on the i5 (Gen 3) to 48 on the Xeon (Gen 3), a 3× expansion for workstation GPU and storage configurations.

The i5-3470 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD 2500) and targets the desktop market; the Xeon W-2195 has no integrated graphics and is aimed at the server/workstation segment. The Xeon’s boost clock of 4.30 GHz is higher than the i5’s 3.60 GHz, though the i5’s base clock of 3.20 GHz exceeds the Xeon’s 2.30 GHz. The Xeon’s TDP is 140 watts versus the i5’s 77 watts, reflecting the massive core count. The sockets differ completely — Intel Socket 1155 for the i5, Intel Socket 2066 for the Xeon — meaning no platform compatibility between them. Both are end-of-life products, with the i5 released on 2012-05-31 and the Xeon on 2017-08-28.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Every head-to-head benchmark result shows the Xeon W-2195 winning by the same 83.4% margin, which is unusual — most CPU comparisons have varying deltas across tests. Here, the consistency suggests the Xeon’s advantage is not workload-specific but fundamental to its architecture and core count. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 2401 against the i5’s 398. That is a 6.03× raw score ratio. In R15 single-core, the Xeon scores 338 against 56 — again a 6.04× ratio. The pattern repeats in R20 multi-core (10007 versus 1661, a 6.02× ratio) and R20 single-core (1412 versus 234, a 6.03× ratio). R23 shows the same: multi-core 23828 versus 3957 (6.02×), single-core 3363 versus 558 (6.03×).

The near-identical ratios across all six tests are striking. It indicates that the Xeon W-2195’s advantage is uniform — roughly six times the performance in every Cinebench metric. This is not a case where the i5-3470 shows relative strength in single-threaded workloads; the Xeon even wins those by the same margin. The i5’s higher base clock (3.20 GHz versus 2.30 GHz) does not translate into any single-thread advantage. The Xeon’s 4.30 GHz boost clock, combined with the Skylake architecture’s higher instructions-per-clock, overcomes the i5’s clock advantage entirely.

For the i5-3470, its best results come from PassMark tests not included in the head-to-head set. Its PassMark single-thread score is 1935, and its multi-thread score is 4669. The data compression score (73224) and integer math (14840) show that the i5 can handle specific workloads reasonably well for its era. But against the Xeon’s Cinebench dominance, these PassMark numbers are irrelevant — the Xeon was not tested in those PassMark categories, and the head-to-head data shows a clean sweep with zero wins for the i5.

FAQ

Q: Why does the Xeon W-2195 win every single benchmark by the exact same percentage?

A: The head-to-head data lists all six Cinebench tests with a deltaPct of -83.4% for the i5-3470. This means the Xeon’s scores are consistently about six times higher across both multi-core and single-core tests, indicating a uniform architectural advantage rather than workload-specific strengths.

Q: Is the Intel Core i5-3470 competitive in any workload against the Xeon W-2195?

A: Based on the available benchmark data, no. The i5-3470 loses all six head-to-head tests. Its PassMark scores (single-thread 1935, multi-thread 4669) are not compared against the Xeon, but the Cinebench results show no category where the i5 takes a win.

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: The i5-3470 has 4 cores and 4 threads. The Xeon W-2195 has 18 cores and 36 threads. That is a 4.5× difference in cores and a 9× difference in threads, which explains the multi-core benchmark dominance.

Q: What are the memory differences between the two CPUs?

A: The i5-3470 supports DDR3 with dual-channel memory and 25.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Xeon W-2195 supports DDR4 with quad-channel memory and 85.3 GB/s bandwidth. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, while the i5 does not.

Q: Do both CPUs have the same performance percentile?

A: Yes. Both the i5-3470 and the Xeon W-2195 have a percentileVsAllCpus of 63. Their average benchmark scores are also nearly identical: 6906 for the i5 and 6892 for the Xeon. This suggests that, despite the Xeon’s head-to-head sweep, their overall performance profiles are similar when averaged across all benchmarks.

Q: Are there any workstation-specific features the Xeon has that the i5 lacks?

A: Yes. The Xeon W-2195 supports ECC memory, has 48 PCIe Gen 3 lanes (versus 16 on the i5), and uses a server/workstation socket (Intel Socket 2066 versus Intel Socket 1155). The Xeon also has no integrated graphics, while the i5 includes Intel HD 2500.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon W-2195 is the superior processor in every measured category. It wins all six head-to-head benchmarks by an identical 83.4% margin, offering roughly six times the performance in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 — both multi-core and single-core. With 18 cores and 36 threads versus the i5-3470’s 4 cores and 4 threads, the Xeon is built for parallel workloads. Its 24.75 MB of L3 cache, quad-channel DDR4 memory support, and 48 PCIe lanes make it a workstation-class part. The i5-3470, with its 4 cores, dual-channel DDR3, and 6 MB of L3 cache, is a legacy desktop chip that cannot compete in any modern multi-threaded application.

However, the aggregate statistics tell a different story. Both CPUs share a 63rd percentile rank against all CPUs, and their average benchmark scores differ by only 0.2% — 6906 for the i5 versus 6892 for the Xeon. This means that across a broader benchmark suite (including PassMark tests where the i5 scores 1935 in single-thread and 4669 in multi-thread), the two chips are statistically equivalent. The Xeon’s Cinebench dominance is offset by the i5’s PassMark results, which are not part of the head-to-head comparison. For a buyer choosing between these two today, the decision comes down to workload. If the task is Cinebench-style rendering or heavily threaded compute, the Xeon W-2195 is the only choice — its 23828 R23 multi-core score is nearly unsurpassable by the i5’s 3957. If the task is legacy single-threaded software or basic desktop use, the i5-3470 holds its own in aggregate benchmarks, but it offers no performance advantage and lacks ECC support, quad-channel memory, and the Xeon’s massive core count. The Xeon W-2195 is the clear winner for professional, multi-threaded workloads. The i5-3470 is a capable legacy part that should only be considered when its 63rd percentile rank and PassMark scores are the relevant metrics — and even then, the Xeon matches or exceeds it in the benchmarks that matter most.