Intel Core i5-4250U vs Intel Xeon X5460 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clean sweep for the Intel Xeon X5460 across every shared benchmark. The Xeon wins all five measured tests, with the Core i5-4250U trailing by a consistent margin of roughly 17% in each case. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Xeon scores 220 against the i5's 182, a delta of -17.3%. The pattern holds in Cinebench R20 multicore: 920 versus 760, a -17.4% gap. Single-core results tell the same story, with the Xeon posting 129 in Cinebench R20 single-core against 107 for the i5 (-17.1%), and 309 versus 255 in Cinebench R23 single-core (-17.5%). The Cinebench R23 multicore run shows 2191 for the Xeon and 1811 for the i5, a -17.3% difference.

These deltas are remarkably uniform, which suggests the performance gap is structural rather than workload-specific. The Xeon's advantage is not a matter of one test favoring its architecture; it is a consistent lead across both single-threaded and multi-threaded rendering workloads. For the i5-4250U, the closest rival in the database is the Intel Core i5-3230M, which sits just 0.2% ahead in average benchmark score, while the Xeon X5460's nearest rival is the same i5-3230M at a 0.1% deficit. Both processors land at the 20th percentile of all CPUs in the database, meaning they occupy the same performance tier overall, despite the Xeon's head-to-head wins.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different eras and design philosophies. The Intel Core i5-4250U is a Haswell architecture part, built on a 22 nm process node with 1,400 million transistors on a 118 mm² die. It uses a dual-core design with four threads via Hyper-Threading, base clock of 1300 MHz, and a boost clock of 2.60 GHz. Its cache layout is per-core: 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, plus 3 MB of shared L3. The i5 is a mobile part, soldered to Intel BGA 1168, with a 15 W TDP and integrated Intel HD 5000 graphics. It supports DDR3 memory without ECC, and its market segment is listed as Mobile.

The Intel Xeon X5460, by contrast, is a Core 2 architecture part from the Harpertown generation, built on a 45 nm process with 820 million transistors spread across a dual-die design of 2x 107 mm². It has four physical cores and four threads, no Hyper-Threading, and runs at a fixed 3.17 GHz base clock with no boost capability. Cache is organized as 64 KB of L1 per core and 6 MB of L2 per die, with no L3 cache present. The Xeon uses Intel Socket 771, carries a 120 W TDP, and is aimed at the server/workstation segment. It supports DDR2 and DDR3 memory depending on the motherboard, with dual-channel memory bus and ECC support. It also lists PCIe Gen 2 connectivity. Notably, it has no integrated graphics, relying on a discrete GPU.

The process node difference is significant: 22 nm versus 45 nm means the i5 packs more transistors into a smaller area, yet the Xeon's older process and higher TDP allow for much higher clock speeds. The i5's 1300 MHz base clock is less than half the Xeon's 3.17 GHz, and even its 2.60 GHz boost does not reach the Xeon's fixed clock. The Xeon's four physical cores provide a raw thread count advantage in some workloads, but the i5's Hyper-Threading gives it four threads from two cores, which can help in lightly threaded tasks. The absence of an L3 cache on the Xeon is notable, as the i5's 3 MB shared L3 may reduce memory latency in certain patterns.

Where Each One Wins

Benchmark results indicate the Xeon X5460 is the outright winner in every measured test, but the use-case split is more nuanced when considering the platforms and features each chip brings. The Xeon wins purely on compute throughput: its higher clock speed and additional physical cores deliver better scores in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both single-core and multicore. For anyone running CPU-bound rendering, encoding, or simulation tasks that scale with clock speed and core count, the Xeon's 17% lead in each test makes it the stronger compute part.

The i5-4250U wins in scenarios that do not appear in the benchmark suite. Its 15 W TDP versus the Xeon's 120 W TDP means it generates far less heat and draws far less power, making it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where the Xeon cannot even be installed due to its Socket 771 form factor. The i5's integrated Intel HD 5000 graphics provide a display output without a discrete GPU, which the Xeon lacks entirely. The i5 also supports ECC-free DDR3 memory, which is standard for consumer mobile systems, while the Xeon requires ECC memory and a server motherboard for full functionality. The i5's Haswell architecture includes newer instruction set features that may benefit modern software, even if the raw scores do not reflect it in these specific Cinebench runs.

In the database's nearest rival data, the i5-4250U sits at an average benchmark score of 756, nearly identical to the Xeon's 754. This suggests that in a broader range of tests beyond Cinebench, the two chips are effectively equivalent. The i5's Geekbench scores (1434 multicore, 742 single-core) are not directly comparable to the Xeon's results because the Xeon lacks Geekbench entries, but the average scores place both at the 20th percentile. The i5's closest rival, the Core i3-5020U, is 0.2% behind, while the Xeon's closest rival, the Core i5-3230M, is 0.1% behind. This means the Xeon is not a dominant part in general; it only dominates this specific matchup.

The Verdict

The data points to a simple conclusion: if the workload is purely about Cinebench-style compute, the Intel Xeon X5460 is the faster chip in every measured scenario. Its 17% lead across all five head-to-head tests is consistent and unambiguous. A user who needs maximum rendering performance from a CPU that can be mounted in a Socket 771 workstation motherboard should choose the Xeon.

However, the i5-4250U is not without justification. The Xeon's 120 W TDP, end-of-life production status, lack of integrated graphics, and requirement for ECC memory make it impractical for most consumer or mobile builds. The i5's 15 W TDP and integrated HD 5000 graphics mean it can serve in a laptop with no additional GPU, and its Haswell architecture provides a modern feature set. The database shows the i5's average benchmark score (756) is effectively identical to the Xeon's (754), so in a balanced suite of tests, the two are peers. The Xeon wins this head-to-head, but the i5 wins on platform flexibility, power efficiency, and availability in mobile form factors.

For a desktop or server workload where the Socket 771 platform is already present, the Xeon X5460 is the clear pick. For a mobile or low-power system, the i5-4250U is the only viable option of the two, and its performance is not far behind in aggregate terms.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher single-core performance in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Xeon X5460 scores 309 in Cinebench R23 single-core, while the Intel Core i5-4250U scores 255, giving the Xeon a 17.5% lead.

Q: How do the two CPUs compare in multi-core Cinebench R20?

A: The Xeon X5460 scores 920, and the i5-4250U scores 760, a delta of -17.4% in favor of the Xeon.

Q: Does the i5-4250U have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the i5-4250U includes Intel HD 5000 integrated graphics. The Xeon X5460 has no integrated graphics at all.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for each chip?

A: The i5-4250U has a 15 W TDP, while the Xeon X5460 has a 120 W TDP, an eight-fold difference in power draw.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Xeon X5460 supports ECC memory, while the i5-4250U does not.

Q: How many cores and threads does each CPU have?

A: The i5-4250U has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the Xeon X5460 has 4 cores and 4 threads.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i5-4250U | Intel Xeon X5460 |

|----------------|---------------------|------------------|

| Cores | 2 | 4 |

| Threads | 4 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 1300 MHz | 3.17 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 2.60 GHz | None |

| TDP | 15 W | 120 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1168 | Intel Socket 771 |

| Architecture | Haswell | Core 2 (Harpertown) |

| Process Node | 22 nm | 45 nm |

| Transistors | 1,400 million | 820 million |

| Die Size | 118 mm² | 2x 107 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 256 KB (per core) | 6 MB (per die) |

| L3 Cache | 3 MB (shared) | None |

| Memory Support | DDR3 | DDR2, DDR3 (depends on motherboard) |

| Memory Bus | Not specified | Dual-channel |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Not specified | Gen 2 |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 5000 | None |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Server/Workstation |

| Release Date | 2013-06-03 | 2007-11-10 |

| Production Status | Not specified | End-of-life |

| Launch MSRP | Not specified | $1172 |