CPU Comparison

The benchmark data places the Intel Xeon E5640 and Intel Core i5-3570T in a statistical dead heat, with average scores of 1137 and 1136 respectively. The Xeon E5640 wins every head-to-head Cinebench test, but by margins of only 0.2–0.3%, which is within run-to-run noise. The real story is how two processors with fundamentally different architectures, one a server part from 2010, the other a low-power desktop chip from 2012, end up with nearly identical performance profiles in modern rendering workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Xeon E5640 edges out the i5-3570T across all five Cinebench comparisons. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 332 against 331 for the i5, a 0.3% lead. The R20 multi-core test shows a similar pattern: 1387 for the Xeon versus 1383 for the i5, again a 0.3% margin. The R23 multi-core result continues the trend, with the Xeon at 3303 and the i5 at 3293, another 0.3% difference.

Single-core results are even tighter. In Cinebench R20 single-core, both processors post an identical score of 195, with the data listing the Xeon as the winner by a 0% delta. The R23 single-core test shows the Xeon at 466 versus 465 for the i5, a 0.2% advantage. These single-core numbers are particularly telling because the i5-3570T has a higher boost clock of 3.30 GHz compared to the Xeon's 2.93 GHz, yet the older Westmere architecture still manages to match or slightly exceed the Ivy Bridge part in per-thread performance.

The multi-core results are even more surprising given the specification gap. The i5-3570T has four cores and four threads, while the Xeon E5640 has four cores and eight threads. Hyper-threading on the Xeon appears to compensate for its lower clock speeds, allowing it to maintain a slight edge in heavily threaded workloads. However, the 0.3% margins are so small that they carry little practical significance, both processors deliver essentially identical Cinebench performance.

The nearestRivals data confirms this equivalence. The i5-3570T lists the Xeon E5640 as a rival with a deltaPct of -0.1%, meaning the Xeon is a hair faster. The Xeon's rival list includes the i5-3570T at +0.1% in the Xeon's favor. Both processors sit at the 32nd percentile among all CPUs, indicating they occupy the same performance tier relative to the broader market.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Xeon E5640 wins all three multi-core Cinebench tests (R15, R20, R23) by 0.3% margins. Its scores of 332, 1387, and 3303 slightly exceed the i5-3570T's 331, 1383, and 3293.

Q: Is there any difference in single-core performance?

A: The two are effectively identical. In Cinebench R20 single-core, both score 195. In R23 single-core, the Xeon scores 466 versus 465 for the i5, a 0.2% difference.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Xeon E5640 has an average benchmark score of 1137, while the i5-3570T scores 1136. This places them at the same 32nd percentile among all CPUs.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Only the Intel Xeon E5640 supports ECC memory. The i5-3570T does not have this feature.

Q: Do these processors have integrated graphics?

A: The i5-3570T includes Intel HD 2500 integrated graphics. The Xeon E5640 has no integrated graphics, as it is a server/workstation part.

Q: What socket do they use?

A: The Xeon E5640 uses Intel Socket 1366, while the i5-3570T uses Intel Socket 1155. These sockets are not cross-compatible.

Architecture Differences

The Xeon E5640 is built on the Westmere architecture (Westmere-EP codename) using a 32 nm process node. It packs 1,170 million transistors into a 239 mm² die. The i5-3570T uses the Ivy Bridge architecture on a 22 nm process node, with 1,400 million transistors on a smaller 160 mm² die. The newer Ivy Bridge process allows for higher transistor density and better power efficiency, which is reflected in the i5's much lower 45 W TDP versus the Xeon's 80 W TDP.

Cache configurations differ significantly. Both have 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core, but the Xeon has 12 MB of shared L3 cache while the i5 has only 6 MB. The Xeon's doubled L3 cache likely contributes to its ability to match the i5 in single-core tests despite a lower boost clock. The i5 compensates with a higher turbo frequency of 3.30 GHz versus the Xeon's 2.93 GHz.

Memory architecture is another key divergence. The Xeon supports triple-channel DDR3 memory, while the i5 only supports dual-channel DDR3. This gives the server part a potential bandwidth advantage in memory-intensive workloads, though the benchmark data does not include a direct memory bandwidth test. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, a feature absent from the i5. PCIe capabilities differ as well: the Xeon offers Gen 2, while the i5 provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU.

The production status also separates them. The Xeon E5640 is listed as end-of-life, while the i5-3570T has no production status listed. The Xeon targets the server/workstation market segment, whereas the i5 is a desktop part. The i5 includes Intel HD 2500 integrated graphics; the Xeon has none. Both processors have locked multipliers, so neither can be overclocked via multiplier adjustment.

Specification Differences

• Threads: The Xeon E5640 has 8 threads; the i5-3570T has 4.
• Base clock: Xeon runs at 2.67 GHz; i5 runs at 2.30 GHz.
• Boost clock: Xeon boosts to 2.93 GHz; i5 boosts to 3.30 GHz.
• TDP: Xeon draws 80 W; i5 draws 45 W.
• Socket: Xeon uses Socket 1366; i5 uses Socket 1155.
• Architecture: Xeon is Westmere (32 nm); i5 is Ivy Bridge (22 nm).
• Transistors: Xeon has 1,170 million; i5 has 1,400 million.
• Die size: Xeon measures 239 mm²; i5 measures 160 mm².
• L3 cache: Xeon has 12 MB shared; i5 has 6 MB shared.
• Memory bus: Xeon is triple-channel; i5 is dual-channel.
• ECC support: Xeon supports ECC; i5 does not.
• PCIe: Xeon is Gen 2; i5 is Gen 3, 16 lanes (CPU only).
• Integrated graphics: Xeon has none; i5 has Intel HD 2500.
• Market segment: Xeon is server/workstation; i5 is desktop.
• Release date: Xeon launched March 2010; i5 launched April 2012.
• Part number: Xeon is SLBVC; i5 is SR0P1.

The Verdict

The data shows these two processors are performance equals in Cinebench workloads, despite their architectural differences. The Xeon E5640 wins all five head-to-head tests, but by margins of 0.0% to 0.3%, which is negligible in real-world terms. Both sit at the 32nd percentile among all CPUs, and their average benchmark scores differ by just one point (1137 vs 1136).

The choice between them comes down to platform requirements, not raw performance. The Xeon E5640 offers ECC memory support, triple-channel memory bandwidth, and eight threads, making it the more capable server/workstation part. It also has twice the L3 cache of the i5. However, it consumes 80 W versus the i5's 45 W, uses an older socket (1366 vs 1155), and lacks integrated graphics. The i5-3570T brings a newer 22 nm process, higher boost clock (3.30 GHz vs 2.93 GHz), PCIe Gen 3 support, and integrated HD 2500 graphics, all in a much lower power envelope.

For users building a system from scratch, the i5-3570T is the more modern platform choice with lower power draw and integrated graphics. For those with an existing Socket 1366 motherboard, the Xeon E5640 provides comparable performance with the added benefits of ECC memory and more L3 cache. Neither processor offers a meaningful performance advantage over the other in the tested Cinebench workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon E5640 wins in server and workstation scenarios where ECC memory is required. Its triple-channel memory bus and 12 MB of L3 cache provide a foundation for memory-intensive tasks, and its eight threads give it an edge in heavily threaded workloads, even if that edge is only 0.3% in Cinebench. The 80 W TDP is acceptable for server environments where power efficiency is less critical than reliability features like ECC.

The i5-3570T wins in desktop and low-power applications. Its 45 W TDP makes it suitable for compact or energy-conscious builds, and the integrated Intel HD 2500 graphics eliminate the need for a discrete GPU in basic systems. The higher 3.30 GHz boost clock and PCIe Gen 3 support offer advantages in lightly threaded tasks and modern expansion cards. Its dual-channel memory bus is sufficient for typical desktop workloads.

For gaming or general desktop use, the i5-3570T is the more practical choice due to its lower power consumption, integrated graphics, and newer platform. For a server or workstation requiring ECC memory and maximum thread count, the Xeon E5640 is the appropriate pick. In pure benchmark terms, the data shows no meaningful winner, the two processors are effectively tied, with the Xeon's 5-0 head-to-head record reflecting differences of less than one third of one percent.