Intel Core i5-4570S vs Intel Xeon Bronze 3106 Comparison

The Intel Core i5-4570S and Intel Xeon Bronze 3106 occupy the same 37th percentile in the global CPU benchmark distribution, with average benchmark scores of 1426 and 1422 respectively. Despite this statistical near-parity in overall standing, their performance profiles diverge sharply across every workload category, with the Xeon Bronze 3106 claiming a clean sweep of all six head-to-head benchmark comparisons. The data paints a picture of two processors that achieve similar aggregate results through entirely different architectural means.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Xeon Bronze 3106 dominates the Core i5-4570S across every measured workload, with margins that remain remarkably consistent. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 495 against the i5's 428, a 13.5% advantage. The single-core R15 test shows a nearly identical gap: 69 versus 60, a 13% difference. This consistency extends through the entire Cinebench suite — R20 multi-core sees the Xeon at 2065 versus 1787 (13.5% ahead), R20 single-core at 291 versus 252 (13.4% ahead), and R23 multi-core at 4918 versus 4256 (13.5% ahead). The R23 single-core result rounds out the pattern with 694 versus 600, another 13.5% margin.

The uniformity of these deltas is noteworthy. Every Cinebench iteration, regardless of whether it stresses one core or all cores, produces a spread of 13% to 13.5%. This suggests the Xeon's advantage is not workload-dependent but rather a fundamental throughput characteristic. The i5-4570S has no winning benchmark in this comparison; the Xeon Bronze 3106 wins all six head-to-head tests. The single-core results are particularly telling — a server-oriented Xeon beating a desktop i5 in lightly threaded workloads indicates that the Xeon's architectural efficiency at lower clock speeds outweighs the i5's raw frequency advantage.

FAQ

Q: How large is the performance gap between the Core i5-4570S and Xeon Bronze 3106 in multi-core workloads?

A: The Xeon Bronze 3106 leads by 13.5% consistently across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests, scoring 495, 2065, and 4918 respectively, compared to the i5's 428, 1787, and 4256.

Q: Does the Core i5-4570S win any benchmark comparisons?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows the Xeon Bronze 3106 winning all six benchmark tests, with the i5-4570S trailing by 13% to 13.5% in every case.

Q: What do the single-core results indicate about these processors?

A: The Xeon Bronze 3106 outperforms the i5-4570S by 13% to 13.5% in all three single-core Cinebench tests (R15, R20, R23), despite having a lower base clock of 2.10 GHz versus 2.90 GHz.

Q: How do these processors compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The i5-4570S has an average score of 1426, placing it 0.2% above the Intel Core i7-3820 (1424) and 0.3% above the Xeon Bronze 3106 (1422). The Xeon sits 0.1% below the i7-3820 and 0.1% above the Intel Core i7-3720QM (1421).

Q: Is the Xeon Bronze 3106's advantage uniform across all benchmark types?

A: Yes, the delta is tightly clustered between 13% and 13.5% across all six tests, indicating a consistent performance advantage rather than workload-specific strengths.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between these two CPUs?

A: The i5-4570S averages 1426 points, while the Xeon Bronze 3106 averages 1422 points — a difference of only 4 points, or roughly 0.3%, despite the Xeon winning every head-to-head test.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon Bronze 3106 wins everywhere in raw compute performance. Its 8 cores and 8 threads provide a clear structural advantage over the i5-4570S's 4 cores and 4 threads, and the benchmark data confirms this translates into real-world superiority across all tested workloads. The Xeon's 13.5% multi-core lead and 13% single-core lead make it the better choice for any compute-intensive task, from rendering to simulation to general productivity.

The i5-4570S's only claim to superiority lies in its platform characteristics rather than benchmark scores. It uses the Intel Socket 1150 with DDR3 memory, making it compatible with older, more established desktop platforms. Its 65 W TDP is substantially lower than the Xeon's 85 W, which matters for systems where thermal output and cooling requirements are constrained. The i5 also includes integrated Intel HD 4600 graphics, eliminating the need for a discrete GPU in basic display scenarios. For users with existing Socket 1150 motherboards and DDR3 memory, the i5-4570S offers a drop-in upgrade path, while the Xeon demands a Socket 3647 platform with DDR4 and a separate graphics solution.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ fundamentally in core configuration. The i5-4570S provides 4 cores and 4 threads, while the Xeon Bronze 3106 doubles this to 8 cores and 8 threads. Clock speeds favor the i5, with a 2.90 GHz base and 3.60 GHz boost against the Xeon's 2.10 GHz base and 3.00 GHz boost. Thermal design power also differs: the i5 draws 65 W versus the Xeon's 85 W.

Memory support separates them clearly. The i5 uses DDR3 with a dual-channel memory bus, while the Xeon uses DDR4 and supports ECC memory — the i5 does not. The i5 features integrated Intel HD 4600 graphics; the Xeon has none. Socket compatibility is entirely distinct: the i5 fits Intel Socket 1150, the Xeon requires Intel Socket 3647. The i5 carries the part number SR14J, while the Xeon's part number is SR3GLBX806733106CD8067303561900. The i5 launched on 2013-06-01, the Xeon on 2017-07-10 — a gap of roughly four years. The i5 has a Gen 3 PCIe interface; the Xeon's PCIe specification is not listed.

Architecture Differences

The i5-4570S is built on Intel's Haswell architecture using a 22 nm process node, containing 1,400 million transistors on a 177 mm² die. The Xeon Bronze 3106 uses the Skylake-SP architecture on a 14 nm node, with 8,000 million transistors — nearly six times the transistor count. The Xeon's die size is not listed.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. Both share 64 KB of L1 cache per core, but the L2 cache diverges: the i5 has 256 KB per core, while the Xeon has 1 MB per core — four times the per-core capacity. The L3 cache also favors the Xeon, with 11 MB shared versus the i5's 6 MB shared. The Xeon's larger caches, combined with its 14 nm process and Skylake-SP microarchitecture, explain how it achieves higher benchmark scores despite significantly lower clock speeds. The i5's Haswell design dates from an earlier era, and while its higher clocks help narrow the gap, the Xeon's architectural advantages in cache capacity and core count prove decisive in every measured test. The Xeon targets the Server/Workstation market segment, while the i5 is a Desktop part, and this positioning is reflected in the Xeon's ECC support and lack of integrated graphics. Both processors have locked multipliers, and neither has a launch MSRP listed.