CPU Comparison

The Intel Xeon E5630 and Intel Core i5-4570T are both 31st-percentile performers, but the data shows they achieve parity through entirely different means. The Xeon E5630 wins every single head-to-head benchmark in this comparison, taking all 5 available tests with margins between 17.8% and 18.6%. The i5-4570T, despite its newer architecture and higher clock speeds, never manages a single win. For raw compute throughput, the Xeon E5630 is the clear choice. The i5-4570T, however, offers a dramatically lower 35W TDP and integrated graphics, making it the only sensible pick for compact, power-constrained desktop builds where the Xeon's server heritage is irrelevant. The verdict is straightforward: if the workload is multi-threaded rendering or any CPU-bound task where the Xeon's 4 cores and 8 threads can stretch their legs, choose the Xeon E5630. If the priority is a low-power, small-form-factor system with built-in display output, the i5-4570T is the only option that fits.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon E5630 is the faster processor in every measured test. It leads the i5-4570T by 17.8% in Cinebench R15 multi-core, 18% in R20 multi-core, 18.6% in R20 single-core, 18.1% in R23 multi-core, and 18.2% in R23 single-core. This is a comprehensive sweep. The Xeon's advantage is remarkably consistent, hovering around 18% regardless of the test's threading model. This suggests a fundamental throughput advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

The i5-4570T's sole redeeming qualities are its 35W TDP and its integrated Intel HD 4600 graphics. The Xeon E5630 consumes 80W, more than double the i5's power budget, and has no integrated graphics at all, requiring a discrete GPU. For a desktop user building a silent, low-power media PC or a basic office machine, the i5-4570T is the only viable choice. For anyone running Cinebench-style workloads, whether that is 3D rendering, video encoding, or scientific computing, the Xeon E5630's extra 18% performance is decisive. The data shows no scenario where the i5-4570T wins a performance comparison. The choice is therefore not about speed, the Xeon wins that outright, but about power envelope and feature set.

Architecture Differences

The two CPUs come from different eras and design philosophies. The Xeon E5630 is a Westmere-EP part, built on a 32 nm process with 1,170 million transistors on a 239 mm² die. It is a server/workstation chip with a 4-core, 8-thread configuration. Its base clock is 2.53 GHz, boosting to 2.80 GHz. The i5-4570T is a Haswell desktop part, built on a newer 22 nm process with 1,400 million transistors on a smaller 177 mm² die. It has only 2 cores and 4 threads, but runs at a much higher 2.90 GHz base clock and 3.60 GHz boost clock.

The cache hierarchy reveals another key divergence. The Xeon E5630 packs a massive 12 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i5-4570T has just 4 MB. Both have 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, but the Xeon's triple the L3 capacity is a significant advantage for server-style workloads with large working sets. The Xeon also supports ECC memory and uses triple-channel DDR3, while the i5-4570T is limited to dual-channel DDR3 with no ECC support.

The i5-4570T counters with a more modern platform. It uses PCIe Gen 3, while the Xeon is stuck on Gen 2. The i5 also integrates Intel HD 4600 graphics, a feature the Xeon lacks entirely. The sockets are incompatible: the Xeon uses Intel Socket 1366, while the i5 uses Intel Socket 1150. The i5 was released in June 2013, over three years after the Xeon's March 2010 launch, and its 22 nm process node is a full generation ahead of the Xeon's 32 nm. These architectural differences explain why the i5 achieves comparable average scores with half the cores and a quarter of the L3 cache: its newer process and higher clocks help it close the gap, but not enough to overtake the Xeon's raw core count and cache advantage.

Where Each One Wins

The head-to-head data shows the Xeon E5630 winning all five benchmark tests. Its largest margin is an 18.6% lead in Cinebench R20 single-core, a surprising result given the i5's higher 3.60 GHz boost clock. This indicates that the Xeon's larger cache and older but more robust Westmere architecture deliver better per-clock performance in this workload. The Xeon also wins the multi-core tests by 17.8% to 18.1%, confirming its advantage scales across both lightly-threaded and heavily-threaded workloads.

The i5-4570T does not win any benchmark, but it wins in the specification sheet. Its 35W TDP is a 56% reduction from the Xeon's 80W, making it the clear choice for power-sensitive applications. The integrated Intel HD 4600 graphics mean it can power a display without a discrete GPU, which the Xeon cannot do. The i5 also runs on a newer socket and platform with PCIe Gen 3 support, offering a more modern upgrade path.

In practical terms, the Xeon E5630 is the choice for any workload that stresses the CPU: rendering, encoding, compilation, or server virtualization. The i5-4570T is the choice for a low-power desktop, a home theater PC, or a basic office system where the CPU is rarely pegged at 100% and power draw and noise are primary concerns. The data shows the Xeon wins on performance, but the i5 wins on efficiency and feature integration.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Xeon E5630. It wins Cinebench R15 multi-core with 324 points versus 275 for the i5-4570T, and leads by 18% in Cinebench R20 multi-core with 1354 points against 1147.

Q: Does the i5-4570T win any benchmark?

A: No. In the provided head-to-head data, the Xeon E5630 wins all 5 tests. The i5-4570T does not win a single benchmark comparison.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The i5-4570T has a 35W TDP, while the Xeon E5630 has an 80W TDP. The i5 consumes less than half the power of the Xeon.

Q: Do both CPUs support ECC memory?

A: No. The Xeon E5630 supports ECC memory, while the i5-4570T does not.

Q: Which CPU has integrated graphics?

A: The i5-4570T has integrated Intel HD 4600 graphics. The Xeon E5630 has no integrated graphics, requiring a separate GPU.

Q: How do the core counts compare?

A: The Xeon E5630 has 4 cores and 8 threads. The i5-4570T has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Xeon E5630's clean sweep is the headline. Its largest win is in Cinebench R20 single-core, where it scores 191 against the i5's 161, a 18.6% margin. This is notable because the i5's 3.60 GHz boost clock is substantially higher than the Xeon's 2.80 GHz boost. The data suggests the Xeon's 12 MB L3 cache and superior memory bandwidth from triple-channel DDR3 compensate for the clock deficit.

In multi-core tests, the Xeon maintains its edge. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 324 points for the Xeon versus 275 for the i5, a 17.8% difference. Cinebench R20 multi-core is nearly identical, with the Xeon at 1354 and the i5 at 1147, an 18% gap. The R23 multi-core test follows the same pattern: 3226 for the Xeon, 2732 for the i5, an 18.1% advantage. The consistency of these margins, all between 17.8% and 18.6%, indicates a stable performance differential that does not fluctuate with workload intensity or thread count.

The single-core R23 result reinforces this: 455 for the Xeon versus 385 for the i5, an 18.2% win. Notably, the i5-4570T has extra Geekbench scores in its benchmark list, 2016 multi-core and 1042 single-core, but these are not part of the head-to-head comparison, so they cannot be used to assess relative performance. Within the tested benchmarks, the Xeon E5630 is faster across the board, with no test coming close to a tie. The data is clear: 5 wins for the Xeon, 0 for the i5.

Specification Differences

The core specification differences are stark. The Xeon E5630 has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the i5-4570T has 2 cores and 4 threads, a 2x core and thread advantage for the Xeon. The Xeon's base clock is 2.53 GHz and boost is 2.80 GHz, while the i5 runs at 2.90 GHz base and 3.60 GHz boost, giving the i5 a 0.37 GHz base and 0.80 GHz boost advantage.

The cache configurations differ significantly. The Xeon has 12 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i5 has only 4 MB. Both have 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core. The Xeon's L3 cache is three times larger, a crucial difference for workloads with large data sets.

Memory support also diverges. The Xeon uses triple-channel DDR3 and supports ECC memory. The i5 uses dual-channel DDR3 and does not support ECC. Both use DDR3 memory, but the Xeon's triple-channel configuration offers more memory bandwidth potential.

The process node and physical characteristics differ. The Xeon is built on a 32 nm process with 1,170 million transistors on a 239 mm² die. The i5 uses a 22 nm process with 1,400 million transistors on a 177 mm² die. Despite having fewer cores, the i5 has more transistors due to its newer process and integrated graphics.

The sockets are incompatible: the Xeon uses Intel Socket 1366, the i5 uses Intel Socket 1150. The Xeon supports PCIe Gen 2, while the i5 supports PCIe Gen 3. The i5 has integrated Intel HD 4600 graphics; the Xeon has none. The Xeon's TDP is 80W, the i5's is 35W. The Xeon is a server/workstation part, the i5 is a desktop part. The Xeon is end-of-life, while the i5's production status is not specified. The Xeon was released in March 2010, the i5 in June 2013. Neither has an unlocked multiplier, and both are manufactured by Intel.