Intel Core i5-4670K vs Intel Xeon E5-2623 v3 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i5-4670K has an average benchmark score of 1656, while the Intel Xeon E5-2623 v3 scores 1630. The i5-4670K sits slightly ahead in the aggregate, though the difference is small enough that both land in similar performance tiers.

Q: How does the Xeon E5-2623 v3 compare to the i5-4670K in multi-core workloads?

A: The Xeon E5-2623 v3 wins all multi-core Cinebench tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 5637 versus 4751 for the i5-4670K, a 15.7% lead. The pattern repeats in R20 (2367 vs 1995) and R15 (568 vs 478).

Q: Does the i5-4670K win any benchmark in the head-to-head comparison?

A: No. The recorded head-to-head data shows the Xeon E5-2623 v3 winning all six tests, including every single-core and multi-core Cinebench variant. The i5-4670K has zero wins in the direct comparison.

Q: What memory features differ between these two CPUs?

A: The i5-4670K supports DDR3 with dual-channel memory and no ECC. The Xeon E5-2623 v3 supports DDR4 with quad-channel memory and ECC, offering a recorded memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The Xeon E5-2623 v3 has 8 threads (4 cores with Hyper-Threading), while the i5-4670K has 4 threads (4 cores without Hyper-Threading). This explains much of the multi-core performance gap.

Q: How do their percentiles compare across all CPUs?

A: The i5-4670K sits at the 40th percentile, while the Xeon E5-2623 v3 sits at the 39th percentile. Despite the Xeon winning every head-to-head test, the i5-4670K edges out the Xeon in overall percentile ranking.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the Haswell architecture family, but they diverge significantly in implementation. The i5-4670K uses the Haswell desktop design with a 22 nm process, 1,400 million transistors, and a die size of 177 mm². The Xeon E5-2623 v3 uses the Haswell-EP server variant, also on 22 nm, but with 2,600 million transistors and a much larger 356 mm² die. The transistor count difference suggests the Xeon integrates additional server-oriented logic, despite both having four physical cores.

The core configuration differs in threading. The i5-4670K provides 4 cores and 4 threads, while the Xeon E5-2623 v3 provides 4 cores and 8 threads. This doubling of logical threads is a key architectural distinction, enabling better utilization of execution resources in parallel workloads.

Cache hierarchy shows another split. Both have 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core, but the shared L3 cache differs: the i5-4670K has 6 MB shared, while the Xeon E5-2623 v3 has 10 MB shared. The larger L3 cache on the Xeon likely aids in server workloads with larger working sets.

Memory support is a major differentiator. The i5-4670K uses DDR3 with a dual-channel memory bus and no ECC support. The Xeon E5-2623 v3 uses DDR4 with a quad-channel memory bus, ECC support, and a recorded memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The quad-channel interface provides substantially more memory throughput for data-intensive tasks.

The socket and platform differ as well. The i5-4670K uses Intel Socket 1150, while the Xeon E5-2623 v3 uses Intel Socket 2011-3. The Xeon also offers PCIe Gen 3 with 40 lanes (CPU only), whereas the i5-4670K offers PCIe Gen 3 without specifying lane count. The Xeon has no integrated graphics, while the i5-4670K includes Intel HD 4600.

The i5-4670K has an unlocked multiplier, making it overclockable, while the Xeon E5-2623 v3 is locked. The Xeon is marked as end-of-life in production status, while the i5-4670K's status is not recorded. The Xeon launched later, in September 2014 versus June 2013, and carries a launch MSRP of $444.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon E5-2623 v3 wins every recorded benchmark. The consistency of the margins is striking. Across all six tests, the Xeon leads by roughly 15% to 16%. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 568 versus 478 for the i5-4670K, a 15.8% advantage. In R15 single-core, the Xeon scores 79 versus 67, a 15.2% lead.

The pattern holds in newer Cinebench versions. In R20 multi-core, the Xeon scores 2367 versus 1995, a 15.7% edge. In R20 single-core, the Xeon scores 333 versus 281, a 15.6% lead. In R23, the Xeon continues with 5637 versus 4751 in multi-core (15.7%) and 795 versus 670 in single-core (15.7%).

The uniformity of these deltas suggests a consistent performance advantage across both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads. The single-core wins are particularly notable because the i5-4670K has a higher base clock (3.40 GHz) and boost clock (3.80 GHz) compared to the Xeon's 3.00 GHz base and 3.50 GHz boost. Despite lower clock speeds, the Xeon still outperforms the i5 in single-core tests, implying architectural efficiency improvements in the Haswell-EP design.

The multi-core results align with the thread advantage. The Xeon's 8 threads versus 4 threads provides a theoretical doubling of parallel capacity, though the measured 15.7% gain is far below that ideal, indicating diminishing returns from thread scheduling and memory latency in these workloads.

Interestingly, the i5-4670K has a higher average benchmark score (1656 vs 1630) and a higher percentile (40 vs 39), despite losing every head-to-head test. This discrepancy arises because the average includes Geekbench scores, which are only recorded for the i5-4670K (3700 multi-core, 1302 single-core) and not for the Xeon. The database does not list Geekbench results for the Xeon, so the aggregate comparison is incomplete.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for multi-threaded and server-oriented tasks: the Intel Xeon E5-2623 v3. It wins all six head-to-head benchmarks with consistent 15% to 16% margins, offering 8 threads, 10 MB of L3 cache, quad-channel DDR4 memory with ECC, and a recorded memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. For workloads that leverage these features, the Xeon is the superior choice.

However, the Intel Core i5-4670K holds its ground in the aggregate metrics. Its average benchmark score of 1656 edges out the Xeon's 1630, and its 40th percentile ranking beats the Xeon's 39th. The i5 also offers an unlocked multiplier for overclocking, integrated Intel HD 4600 graphics, and a lower TDP of 84 watts versus 105 watts for the Xeon. For a desktop user who overclocks and does not need ECC or quad-channel memory, the i5-4670K remains a viable pick.

The Xeon E5-2623 v3 is end-of-life and locked, making it a less flexible option for enthusiasts. But for a workstation or server environment where stability, ECC memory, and high memory bandwidth matter, the Xeon's benchmark dominance and platform features make it the stronger candidate. The recorded data shows zero wins for the i5-4670K in direct comparison, so any selection of the i5 must rest on its non-benchmark attributes.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i5-4670K | Intel Xeon E5-2623 v3 |

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

| Threads | 4 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 3.40 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.80 GHz | 3.50 GHz |

| TDP | 84 W | 105 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1150 | Intel Socket 2011-3 |

| Codename | Haswell | Haswell-EP |

| Generation | Core i5 (Haswell) | Xeon E5 (Haswell-EP) |

| Transistors | 1,400 million | 2,600 million |

| Die Size | 177 mm² | 356 mm² |

| L3 Cache | 6 MB (shared) | 10 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR3 | DDR4 |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Quad-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not recorded | 59.7 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 3 | Gen 3, 40 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 4600 | None |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

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

| Release Date | 2013-06-01 | 2014-09-07 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $444 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Part Number | SR14A | SR208 |

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon E5-2623 v3 wins every measured benchmark, so its domain is performance-critical applications. The 15.7% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core (5637 vs 4751) makes it the pick for rendering, simulation, or any parallel compute task. The single-core wins (795 vs 670 in R23) also indicate better per-thread efficiency despite lower clocks, making it suitable for lightly threaded workloads that still demand high IPC. Its quad-channel DDR4 with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support positions it for memory-heavy server tasks, database operations, or long-running workstation jobs where data integrity is paramount.

The i5-4670K wins in flexibility and desktop integration. Its unlocked multiplier allows overclocking beyond the recorded 3.80 GHz boost clock, a feature the locked Xeon cannot match. The integrated Intel HD 4600 graphics eliminates the need for a discrete GPU in basic display scenarios, whereas the Xeon requires a separate graphics card. The lower TDP of 84 watts versus 105 watts makes the i5 easier to cool and more energy-efficient in a desktop chassis. Its 40th percentile ranking versus the Xeon's 39th suggests that in mixed workloads, where Geekbench results factor in, the i5 holds a slight aggregate edge.

For a system builder prioritizing raw benchmark performance, especially in multi-threaded and server contexts, the Xeon E5-2623 v3 is the data-backed choice. For a desktop user who values overclocking, integrated graphics, and lower power consumption, the i5-4670K offers advantages that benchmarks alone cannot capture. The recorded data shows the Xeon winning all six direct tests, but the i5's higher average score and percentile indicate that its performance profile is competitive in a broader context.