Intel Core i5-4670R vs Intel Xeon W-2102 Comparison

The Intel Xeon W-2102 and Intel Core i5-4670R are both 4-core, 4-thread processors, yet they target fundamentally different platforms. The data shows a remarkably consistent performance relationship: the i5-4670R wins every single head-to-head benchmark, but by margins so narrow (between 1.5% and 1.8%) that they are practically indistinguishable in real-world use. The real story lies in the architectural and platform chasm between a 2017 server/workstation chip on Socket 2066 and a 2013 desktop chip on BGA 1364.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results offer a clear-cut split: the Core i5-4670R wins in every workload category tested. Across all six Cinebench tests—spanning R15, R20, and R23, and covering both single-core and multi-core scenarios—the i5-4670R emerges victorious. Its largest margin of victory is a 1.8% lead in the multi-core tests (R15, R20, and R23), while its single-core advantages are slightly smaller at 1.5% to 1.6%. This consistency suggests a general performance edge rather than a workload-specific strength.

The Xeon W-2102, despite its server pedigree, does not win a single benchmark in this comparison. Its wins are not measured in scores but in platform attributes. It is the only one of the two with ECC memory support, quad-channel DDR4 memory, and 48 PCIe Gen 3 lanes (CPU only). For a workstation user who requires error-correcting memory or massive I/O bandwidth, the Xeon’s value proposition exists entirely outside the Cinebench scores. The i5-4670R, by contrast, is the performance winner in every tested metric, but it lacks these server-class features entirely.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent different eras of Intel design. The Xeon W-2102 is built on Skylake-W architecture using a 14 nm process, with a die size of 484 mm². The i5-4670R uses the older Haswell architecture on a 22 nm process, with a much smaller die at 177 mm² and 1,400 million transistors. This generational gap is immediately visible in their cache hierarchies. The Xeon provides 1 MB of L2 cache per core and a shared 8.25 MB L3 cache, while the i5-4670R offers only 256 KB of L2 per core and a smaller 4 MB shared L3. Despite the Xeon’s larger caches and newer process node, it still loses in raw benchmark speed.

The memory subsystems diverge sharply. The Xeon supports DDR4 memory over a quad-channel bus with a stated bandwidth of 85.3 GB/s, whereas the i5-4670R uses DDR3 memory with no listed bus width or bandwidth figure. ECC memory is supported on the Xeon but not on the i5. The integrated graphics also differ: the i5-4670R includes Intel Iris? Pro 5200, while the Xeon has no integrated graphics at all. The Xeon’s 120 W TDP is nearly double the i5’s 65 W, reflecting the workstation-oriented power delivery and the larger die.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The six head-to-head Cinebench results tell a story of near-parity. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i5-4670R scores 448 against the Xeon’s 440, a 1.8% difference. The single-core R15 test shows 63 versus 62, a 1.6% gap. Moving to R20, the multi-core results are 1868 for the i5 and 1835 for the Xeon (1.8% delta), while single-core is 263 versus 259 (1.5% delta). In the latest R23 test, the i5-4670R scores 4448 multi-core and 627 single-core, against the Xeon’s 4370 and 617, respectively. The deltas remain pinned at 1.8% for multi-core and 1.6% for single-core across all generations of the test.

The consistency is striking. The i5-4670R’s base clock of 3.00 GHz and boost clock of 3.70 GHz give it a clock-speed advantage over the Xeon’s fixed 2.90 GHz base clock with no boost. The i5’s unlocked multiplier further suggests headroom for manual tuning, though the data does not include overclocked results. The Xeon’s larger L3 cache and newer architecture do not translate into a performance lead; instead, the higher clocks of the i5 appear to carry the day. The average benchmark scores reflect this: the i5-4670R averages 1286 across all tests, while the Xeon averages 1264, a difference of roughly 1.7%.

Specification Differences

The two processors diverge on nearly every specification except core count, threads, and manufacturer. The Xeon W-2102 has a base clock of 2.90 GHz with no boost clock listed, while the i5-4670R starts at 3.00 GHz and boosts to 3.70 GHz. The Xeon’s TDP is 120 W versus the i5’s 65 W. Their sockets are incompatible: the Xeon uses Intel Socket 2066, while the i5 is soldered to Intel BGA 1364. The process node differs (14 nm versus 22 nm), as does the die size (484 mm² versus 177 mm²).

Cache configurations are substantially different. The Xeon has 1 MB L2 per core and 8.25 MB shared L3, while the i5 has 256 KB L2 per core and 4 MB shared L3. Both share the same 64 KB L1 per core. Memory support separates them completely: the Xeon uses DDR4 with quad-channel support and 85.3 GB/s bandwidth, plus ECC; the i5 uses DDR3 with no listed bandwidth or bus width and no ECC. The Xeon offers 48 PCIe Gen 3 lanes (CPU only), while the i5 has no PCIe specification listed. The i5 includes Intel Iris? Pro 5200 integrated graphics; the Xeon has none. The Xeon’s multiplier is locked, while the i5’s is unlocked. Their release dates are four years apart (2017 versus 2013), and their production statuses are end-of-life versus active.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core Cinebench tests?

A: The Intel Core i5-4670R wins all three multi-core tests (R15, R20, R23) with scores of 448, 1868, and 4448, respectively. The Xeon W-2102 trails by 1.8% in each case, scoring 440, 1835, and 4370.

Q: Does the Xeon’s larger cache give it a single-core advantage?

A: No. Despite having 8.25 MB of shared L3 cache and 1 MB L2 per core, the Xeon loses all three single-core tests. The i5-4670R scores 63, 263, and 627 in R15, R20, and R23 single-core tests, while the Xeon scores 62, 259, and 617—a consistent 1.5-1.6% deficit.

Q: Can I use ECC memory with either processor?

A: Only the Xeon W-2102 supports ECC memory. The Core i5-4670R does not list ECC support in its specifications.

Q: How do their memory bandwidth capabilities compare?

A: The Xeon W-2102 supports DDR4 memory over a quad-channel bus with a specified bandwidth of 85.3 GB/s. The i5-4670R supports DDR3 memory, but its memory bus width and bandwidth are not listed in the data.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core i5-4670R includes Intel Iris? Pro 5200 integrated graphics. The Xeon W-2102 has no integrated graphics listed.

Q: Are these processors in the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, both rank in the 35th percentile against all CPUs tracked. The i5-4670R has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 1286, compared to the Xeon’s 1264.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: the Intel Core i5-4670R is the faster processor in every benchmark measured. It wins all six Cinebench tests, and its average benchmark score of 1286 places it alongside the Intel Core i5-3570 (delta 0%), while the Xeon’s 1264 average matches the Intel Core i3-1005G1 (delta -0.1%). For pure compute workloads, the i5-4670R is the pick, especially given its lower 65 W TDP and unlocked multiplier.

However, the Xeon W-2102 is not without its reasons to exist. Its quad-channel DDR4 memory with 85.3 GB/s bandwidth, ECC support, and 48 PCIe Gen 3 lanes make it a platform for workstation tasks that demand memory integrity and I/O expansion. The i5-4670R cannot offer any of these. A buyer needing ECC memory or massive PCIe connectivity should choose the Xeon, accepting a 1.5-1.8% performance penalty. A buyer prioritizing raw Cinebench scores and lower power consumption should choose the i5-4670R. The Xeon’s end-of-life status and the i5’s active production status further tilt the long-term availability argument toward the i5, but the platform requirements will ultimately decide which processor fits. The benchmark data says the i5 is faster; the specification data says the Xeon is more capable in specific enterprise scenarios. Choose based on the platform, not the scores.