Intel Core i5-4590T vs Intel Xeon E5-1410 v2 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data shows a consistent pattern across every shared workload: the Intel Xeon E5-1410 v2 holds a decisive advantage over the Intel Core i5-4590T. In the Cinebench R15 multi-core test, the Xeon scores 476 against the Core i5's 347, a gap of 37.2 percent. That same margin repeats almost exactly in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the Xeon posts 1987 and the Core i5 manages 1446, a 37.4 percent difference. The Cinebench R23 multi-core result is equally one-sided: 4732 for the Xeon versus 3445 for the Core i5, again 37.4 percent ahead.

Single-core performance follows the same trajectory, which is notable because single-threaded workloads often favor lower-power desktop parts. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the Xeon scores 280 while the Core i5 scores 204, a 37.3 percent lead. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 668 against 486, a 37.4 percent advantage. The consistency of these deltas across both multi-threaded and single-threaded tests suggests the Xeon's advantage is structural rather than workload-specific. It is not simply a matter of having more threads available; the Xeon wins by nearly identical margins in every category.

The Core i5-4590T does appear in the database with additional Geekbench results that the Xeon does not have recorded, so no direct head-to-head comparison is possible for those tests. But for the five shared benchmarks, the Xeon wins all five, and the Core i5 wins none. The smallest recorded gap is 37.2 percent in Cinebench R15 multi-core, and the largest is 37.4 percent, which appears in four separate tests. That uniformity makes the result easy to summarize: in every measured workload, the Xeon delivers roughly 37 percent more performance.

The average benchmark score in the database reinforces this picture. The Xeon has an average score of 1368 across all recorded tests, placing it at the 36th percentile of all CPUs. The Core i5 has an average of 1340, also at the 36th percentile. Despite the near-identical average scores, the head-to-head results tell a different story because the two processors were tested in different benchmark suites. The Xeon's average is pulled from its Cinebench results, while the Core i5's average includes Geekbench scores, which are not directly comparable. The head-to-head tests, which use identical workloads, are the more reliable measure, and they consistently favor the Xeon.

Looking at the nearest rivals in the database provides additional context. The Xeon E5-1410 v2 sits between the AMD Opteron 6376 and the Intel Core i7-2600, with average scores of 1370 and 1370 respectively, showing deltas of -0.1 percent and -0.2 percent. It also sits near the Intel Xeon D-1521 at 1367 and the Intel Core i7-3820QM at 1366, with deltas of 0.1 percent in both cases. The Core i5-4590T, by contrast, sits near the Intel Core i5-760 at 1337, the Intel Core i5-4670 at 1347, the Intel Core i5-7400T at 1348, and the Intel Xeon W-2104 at 1350. Its deltas range from 0.2 percent to -0.7 percent. Neither processor dramatically outclasses its immediate peers, but the Xeon's peer group consists of server and workstation parts, while the Core i5's peer group consists mostly of desktop processors.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: the Intel Xeon E5-1410 v2 is the stronger processor in every benchmark shared between the two. Its 37 percent advantage across all five common tests is not marginal, and it applies equally to single-core and multi-core workloads. Anyone choosing between these two strictly on measured performance should select the Xeon.

The Core i5-4590T does have one clear advantage in the recorded specifications: power consumption. Its TDP is 35 watts, compared to 80 watts for the Xeon. That is a significant difference for systems where heat output and cooling requirements are primary concerns. The Core i5 also includes integrated graphics, the Intel HD 4600, while the Xeon has no integrated graphics recorded. For a system that needs a display output without a discrete graphics card, the Core i5 is the only option of the two.

The Xeon's market segment is listed as Server/Workstation, while the Core i5 is listed as Desktop. That distinction aligns with the performance data. The Xeon is built for sustained multi-threaded workloads, and its 8 threads versus the Core i5's 4 threads give it a structural advantage in parallel tasks. The Core i5 is built for efficiency, with a lower TDP and a smaller die, and it is better suited to compact or power-constrained desktop builds.

The launch MSRP for the Core i5-4590T is $192. No launch MSRP is recorded for the Xeon. The Xeon is marked as end-of-life, as is the Core i5, so availability may vary. The Xeon uses the Intel Socket 1356 platform, while the Core i5 uses Intel Socket 1150, so the motherboard choice is a deciding factor that cannot be ignored.

For a buyer building a new system from scratch, the socket difference may be the most practical consideration. The Xeon requires a server-class motherboard with Socket 1356 support, while the Core i5 fits the more common Socket 1150 desktop boards. But the benchmark data is unambiguous: the Xeon outperforms the Core i5 by roughly 37 percent in every measured test, and no recorded workload favors the Core i5.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-core benchmark score?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-1410 v2 wins all four shared multi-core tests. In Cinebench R15 multi-core it scores 476 versus 347, in Cinebench R20 multi-core it scores 1987 versus 1446, and in Cinebench R23 multi-core it scores 4732 versus 3445.

Q: How large is the performance gap in single-core tests?

A: The Xeon leads by 37.3 percent in Cinebench R20 single-core (280 versus 204) and by 37.4 percent in Cinebench R23 single-core (668 versus 486).

Q: Does the Core i5-4590T win any benchmark?

A: No. In the five shared benchmarks, the Core i5 wins zero tests. The Xeon wins all five.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two processors?

A: The Core i5-4590T has a TDP of 35 watts, while the Xeon E5-1410 v2 has a TDP of 80 watts. The Core i5 draws less than half the power budget.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Xeon E5-1410 v2 supports ECC memory, while the Core i5-4590T does not.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Core i5-4590T includes the Intel HD 4600 integrated graphics. The Xeon E5-1410 v2 has no integrated graphics recorded in the database.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specification fields. The Xeon E5-1410 v2 has 8 threads, while the Core i5-4590T has 4 threads. Both have 4 cores. The Xeon has a base clock of 2.80 GHz and a boost clock of 3.20 GHz. The Core i5 has a base clock of 2000.00 MHz and a boost clock of 3.00 GHz. The Xeon's TDP is 80 watts, and the Core i5's TDP is 35 watts.

The sockets are incompatible. The Xeon uses Intel Socket 1356, and the Core i5 uses Intel Socket 1150. The memory bus also differs: the Xeon supports triple-channel DDR3 with a memory bandwidth of 32.0 GB/s, while the Core i5 supports dual-channel DDR3 with a memory bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s. ECC memory is supported by the Xeon but not by the Core i5.

The PCIe configurations differ as well. The Xeon provides Gen 3 with 24 lanes (CPU only), while the Core i5 provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The Xeon has no integrated graphics, while the Core i5 includes Intel HD 4600. The transistor counts differ: the Xeon has 1,860 million transistors on a 257 mm² die, while the Core i5 has 1,400 million transistors on a 177 mm² die. The L3 cache is 10 MB shared on the Xeon and 6 MB shared on the Core i5. Both have 64 KB L1 per core and 256 KB L2 per core. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

The market segments differ: the Xeon is a Server/Workstation part, and the Core i5 is a Desktop part. Both are marked end-of-life. The release dates are close, with the Xeon released in January 2014 and the Core i5 in May 2014. The part numbers differ: SR1B0 for the Xeon and SR1S6 for the Core i5.

Architecture Differences

The Xeon E5-1410 v2 is built on the Ivy Bridge architecture with the codename Ivy Bridge-EN, while the Core i5-4590T uses the Haswell architecture with the codename Haswell. Both are fabricated on a 22 nm process at Intel, but the underlying designs differ. The Xeon uses a server-oriented implementation with a larger die, 257 mm², and more transistors, 1,860 million. The Core i5 uses a desktop-oriented implementation with a 177 mm² die and 1,400 million transistors.

The core and thread counts reflect their different design goals. The Xeon has 4 cores and 8 threads, enabling simultaneous multithreading. The Core i5 has 4 cores and 4 threads, with no hyper-threading. This explains part of the Xeon's multi-core advantage, but it does not explain the single-core advantage, which is consistent even in tests that use only one thread.

The cache hierarchy differs in the shared L3 portion. The Xeon has 10 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core i5 has 6 MB. Both have the same per-core L1 and L2 sizes. The larger L3 cache on the Xeon likely contributes to its performance in memory-sensitive workloads.

The memory architecture also differs. The Xeon supports triple-channel DDR3 with a theoretical bandwidth of 32.0 GB/s, while the Core i5 supports dual-channel DDR3 with 25.6 GB/s. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, a feature absent from the Core i5. These differences position the Xeon for reliability-critical server and workstation environments, while the Core i5 targets mainstream desktop use.

The integrated graphics situation is a major architectural difference. The Core i5 includes the Intel HD 4600, which provides a display output without a separate graphics card. The Xeon has no integrated graphics, meaning it requires a discrete GPU for any video output. This is typical for server processors, where headless operation is common.

The PCIe lane counts also reflect their target markets. The Xeon provides 24 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU, while the Core i5 provides 16. The extra lanes on the Xeon support more expansion cards, storage controllers, or network adapters in a server chassis.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon E5-1410 v2 wins in every benchmark category recorded in the database. It leads by 37.2 percent in Cinebench R15 multi-core, by 37.4 percent in Cinebench R20 multi-core and single-core, and by 37.4 percent in Cinebench R23 multi-core and single-core. For any workload that relies on CPU computation, whether single-threaded or multi-threaded, the Xeon is the stronger choice. Its 8 threads and 10 MB of L3 cache give it an edge in parallel rendering, compilation, scientific computing, and other server-style tasks. Its triple-channel memory bus and 32.0 GB/s bandwidth further support memory-heavy applications. Its ECC memory support makes it suitable for systems where data integrity is critical.

The Core i5-4590T wins in areas not covered by the benchmark suite. Its 35 watt TDP is less than half the Xeon's 80 watt TDP, making it the better option for power-constrained builds, small-form-factor systems, or any environment where heat dissipation is a concern. Its integrated Intel HD 4600 graphics eliminate the need for a discrete GPU in basic desktop use, media playback, or office productivity. Its Socket 1150 platform is more common in desktop motherboards, which may simplify system assembly and reduce platform costs. For a quiet, low-power home or office PC that does not demand maximum CPU throughput, the Core i5 is the more practical fit despite losing every benchmark.

The use-case split is clear. The Xeon serves workloads that prioritize throughput, memory bandwidth, and ECC reliability. The Core i5 serves workloads that prioritize low power draw, integrated graphics, and desktop platform compatibility. The benchmark data favors the Xeon in raw performance, but the specification data shows the Core i5 has legitimate advantages in efficiency and platform simplicity.