Intel Core i5-4300M vs Intel Xeon W5590 Comparison

The Intel Xeon W5590 and the Intel Core i5-4300M represent two very different approaches to processor design, separated by four years of architectural evolution and aimed at entirely different market segments. The Xeon W5590 is a 130-watt server and workstation part built on the 45 nm Nehalem architecture, while the Core i5-4300M is a 37-watt mobile processor built on the 22 nm Haswell architecture. Despite these fundamental differences, both processors land at the 27th percentile among all CPUs in the database, and their average benchmark scores are nearly identical: 986 for the Xeon W5590 and 1004 for the Core i5-4300M. The recorded data shows a closer competition than the specifications might suggest, with the older workstation chip winning all five head-to-head Cinebench tests while the mobile chip counters with additional Geekbench results and dramatically lower power consumption.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon W5590 has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core i5-4300M has 2 cores and 4 threads. The Xeon offers double the core count and double the thread count of the mobile i5.

Q: What are the clock speeds of the two processors?

A: The Intel Xeon W5590 has a base clock of 3.33 GHz and a boost clock of 3.60 GHz. The Intel Core i5-4300M has a base clock of 2.60 GHz and the same boost clock of 3.60 GHz.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Intel Xeon W5590 supports ECC memory with triple-channel DDR3 and a memory bandwidth of 32.0 GB/s. The Intel Core i5-4300M does not support ECC memory and has no memory bus or bandwidth data recorded in the database.

Q: Which processor includes integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core i5-4300M includes Intel HD 5000 integrated graphics. The Intel Xeon W5590 has no integrated graphics, which is typical for a server and workstation part.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel Core i5-4300M has an average benchmark score of 1004, which is slightly higher than the Intel Xeon W5590's average of 986. The difference is about 1.8 percent, placing both at the 27th percentile among all CPUs.

Q: Which processor won the head-to-head Cinebench tests?

A: The Intel Xeon W5590 won all five head-to-head Cinebench tests, with margins ranging from 13.4 percent to 14 percent. The Intel Core i5-4300M won none of the recorded head-to-head Cinebench comparisons.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors spans two distinct Intel microarchitectures and fabrication nodes. The Intel Xeon W5590 is built on the Nehalem architecture with the codename Gainestown, manufactured on a 45 nm process. The Intel Core i5-4300M uses the Haswell architecture with the codename Haswell, manufactured on a 22 nm process. The node shrink from 45 nm to 22 nm allowed Intel to pack significantly more transistors into a smaller area: the Xeon W5590 contains 731 million transistors on a 263 mm² die, while the Core i5-4300M contains 1,400 million transistors on a 118 mm² die. The mobile chip holds nearly double the transistor count in less than half the die area, a direct consequence of the more advanced fabrication process.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially between the two. Both processors share the same per-core L1 cache at 64 KB per core and the same per-core L2 cache at 256 KB per core. The critical difference appears at the L3 level: the Xeon W5590 has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core i5-4300M has only 3 MB of shared L3 cache. With four cores accessing a larger pool of shared cache, the Xeon has an advantage in workloads that benefit from a large working set resident in L3. The mobile i5 compensates with a more efficient architecture and higher per-core performance per watt, but it cannot match the raw cache capacity of the older server part.

Memory support also separates the two designs. The Xeon W5590 supports DDR3 memory with a triple-channel memory bus and a recorded memory bandwidth of 32.0 GB/s, along with ECC memory support. The Core i5-4300M supports DDR3 memory as well, but the database records no memory bus configuration and no memory bandwidth figure for it. The Xeon also lacks ECC support on the mobile chip, which aligns with its server and workstation positioning versus the consumer mobile segment.

The PCIe implementation differs as well. The Xeon W5590 supports PCIe Gen 2, while the Core i5-4300M has no PCIe generation recorded in the database. Integrated graphics are exclusive to the Core i5-4300M, which includes Intel HD 5000, while the Xeon W5590 has no integrated graphics at all. These feature differences reflect the intended deployment: the Xeon W5590 targets systems with discrete graphics and server-grade memory configurations, while the Core i5-4300M integrates graphics and memory controllers into a mobile-focused package.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear choice for different use cases, and the decision hinges on workload type and platform constraints rather than raw performance alone. For multicore and single-core Cinebench workloads, the Intel Xeon W5590 is the stronger processor. It wins all five head-to-head comparisons, with margins between 13.4 percent and 14 percent across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multicore tests. Anyone running CPU-bound rendering or simulation tasks that use these benchmarks as a proxy should select the Xeon W5590, provided the platform can accommodate a 130-watt processor on Intel Socket 1366.

The Intel Core i5-4300M, however, counters with a dramatically lower 37-watt TDP versus 130 watts, making it the only realistic option for mobile or low-power environments. The database records no head-to-head Geekbench comparison, but the Core i5-4300M has its own Geekbench results: 1817 in multicore and 882 in singlecore. These scores do not appear in the head-to-head table, so they cannot be directly compared to the Xeon, but they provide a reference point for the mobile chip's capability. The Core i5-4300M also includes integrated graphics, making it a complete package for a laptop where the Xeon would require a separate discrete GPU.

The average benchmark scores add nuance to the verdict. The Core i5-4300M posts an average benchmark score of 1004, slightly ahead of the Xeon W5590's 986. This aggregate metric, which includes the Geekbench results that the Xeon does not have, suggests that the mobile chip holds its own in the broader benchmark landscape despite losing every Cinebench head-to-head. The Xeon W5590's nearest rivals all sit within 0.3 percent of its average score: the Intel Core i7-875K at 984, the Intel Core i3-4130T at 984, the Intel Xeon X3470 at 983, and the Intel Core i3-4370T at 983. The Core i5-4300M's nearest rivals are similarly tight, with the Intel Core i5-2500S at 1004, the Intel Core i7-5600U at 1005, the Intel Core i7-2630QM at 1005, and the AMD FX-9830P at 1006.

The practical verdict is platform-driven. Server and workstation builders with Socket 1366 infrastructure should choose the Xeon W5590 for its consistent Cinebench superiority and ECC memory support. Mobile users should choose the Core i5-4300M for its 37-watt power envelope, integrated graphics, and Haswell-era efficiency. Neither processor is a universal winner; the Xeon leads in the recorded Cinebench suite while the i5 leads in power efficiency and aggregate score.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two processors:

• Cores: Intel Xeon W5590 has 4 cores; Intel Core i5-4300M has 2 cores.
• Threads: Intel Xeon W5590 has 8 threads; Intel Core i5-4300M has 4 threads.
• Base clock: Intel Xeon W5590 runs at 3.33 GHz; Intel Core i5-4300M runs at 2.60 GHz.
• Boost clock: Both run at 3.60 GHz; no difference here.
• TDP: Intel Xeon W5590 has a 130-watt TDP; Intel Core i5-4300M has a 37-watt TDP.
• Socket: Intel Xeon W5590 uses Intel Socket 1366; Intel Core i5-4300M uses Intel Socket G3.
• Architecture: Intel Xeon W5590 uses Nehalem; Intel Core i5-4300M uses Haswell.
• Codename: Intel Xeon W5590 is Gainestown; Intel Core i5-4300M is Haswell.
• Process node: Intel Xeon W5590 uses 45 nm; Intel Core i5-4300M uses 22 nm.
• Transistors: Intel Xeon W5590 has 731 million; Intel Core i5-4300M has 1,400 million.
• Die size: Intel Xeon W5590 measures 263 mm²; Intel Core i5-4300M measures 118 mm².
• L3 cache: Intel Xeon W5590 has 8 MB shared; Intel Core i5-4300M has 3 MB shared.
• Memory bus: Intel Xeon W5590 uses triple-channel; Intel Core i5-4300M has no recorded memory bus.
• Memory bandwidth: Intel Xeon W5590 has 32.0 GB/s; Intel Core i5-4300M has no recorded memory bandwidth.
• ECC memory: Supported on Intel Xeon W5590; not supported on Intel Core i5-4300M.
• PCIe: Intel Xeon W5590 supports Gen 2; Intel Core i5-4300M has no recorded PCIe generation.
• Integrated graphics: None on Intel Xeon W5590; Intel HD 5000 on Intel Core i5-4300M.
• Market segment: Intel Xeon W5590 is Server/Workstation; Intel Core i5-4300M is Mobile.
• Release date: Intel Xeon W5590 released 2009-08-08; Intel Core i5-4300M released 2013-08-31.
• Launch MSRP: Intel Xeon W5590 had a launch MSRP of $1600; Intel Core i5-4300M has no recorded launch MSRP.
• Production status: Intel Xeon W5590 is end-of-life; Intel Core i5-4300M has no recorded production status.
• Part number: Intel Xeon W5590 is SLBGE; Intel Core i5-4300M has no recorded part number.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark table records five Cinebench comparisons, and the Intel Xeon W5590 wins all five. The largest margin appears in Cinebench R20 multicore and Cinebench R23 multicore, where the Xeon leads by 14 percent in both. In Cinebench R20 multicore, the Xeon scores 1204 against the Core i5-4300M's 1056. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Xeon scores 2867 against 2515. These multicore results highlight the advantage of four cores and eight threads over two cores and four threads, even when the newer architecture and smaller process node give the mobile chip a per-core efficiency edge.

The single-core tests show a similar pattern, though with slightly smaller margins. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the Xeon W5590 scores 169 against 149, a 13.4 percent advantage. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Xeon scores 404 against 355, a 13.8 percent advantage. The Xeon's higher base clock of 3.33 GHz versus 2.60 GHz contributes to this lead, and both processors boost to the same 3.60 GHz ceiling, which means the Xeon spends less time below its maximum frequency. The single-core margins of 13.4 percent and 13.8 percent align closely with the multicore margins of 14 percent, indicating that the Xeon's advantage is consistent across both single-threaded and multi-threaded Cinebench workloads.

Cinebench R15 multicore completes the sweep, with the Xeon W5590 scoring 288 against 253, a 13.8 percent advantage. This result follows the same pattern as the newer Cinebench versions, showing that the Xeon's lead is stable across benchmark generations rather than an artifact of a specific test version. The consistency of the margins, all clustering between 13.4 percent and 14 percent, suggests a systematic performance gap rather than workload-specific variation.

The Core i5-4300M has no wins in the head-to-head table, but it does have additional benchmark data that the Xeon lacks. The mobile chip records Geekbench multicore and single-core scores of 1817 and 882 respectively. These Geekbench results are not part of the head-to-head comparison, so they cannot be used to claim a direct win for either processor, but they contribute to the Core i5-4300M's average benchmark score of 1004, which edges out the Xeon's 986. The average score calculation includes these additional tests, which partially explains why the mobile chip has a higher aggregate despite losing every Cinebench comparison.

The nearest rival data places both processors in similar company. The Xeon W5590's closest rival is the Intel Core i7-875K at 984, a 0.2 percent difference, followed by the Intel Core i3-4130T at 984 with the same 0.2 percent gap, then the Intel Xeon X3470 and Intel Core i3-4370T at 983 with 0.3 percent gaps. The Core i5-4300M's closest rival is the Intel Core i5-2500S at 1004 with no difference, then the Intel Core i7-5600U and Intel Core i7-2630QM at 1005 with negative 0.1 percent gaps, and the AMD FX-9830P at 1006 with a negative 0.2 percent gap. These tight clusters show that both processors sit in competitive performance bands for their respective eras, with the Xeon matching desktop i7 and i3 parts from its generation while the i5 matches a mix of desktop and mobile parts from its generation.