CPU Comparison
Intel Core i5-4690T
Xeon E5640
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: Intel Core i5-4690T vs Intel Xeon E5640
The Intel Core i5-4690T is the clear performance winner in this comparison, taking all five head-to-head benchmark victories with a consistent margin of roughly 15.4–15.6% over the Intel Xeon E5640. The Xeon’s only advantages are architectural: it supports ECC memory, uses a triple-channel memory bus, and offers more shared L3 cache, but none of these translate into a single benchmark win. For any workload measured by Cinebench, the i5-4690T is the superior choice, while the Xeon E5640 remains relevant only for specific server-oriented use cases requiring ECC or older-socket compatibility.
The Verdict
The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i5-4690T wins every benchmark in the head-to-head set, and its average benchmark score of 1129 is nearly identical to the Xeon’s 1137, yet the per-test deltas show a consistent edge. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i5-4690T scores 3905 versus the Xeon’s 3303, a 15.4% advantage. Single-core performance tells the same story: the i5-4690T leads 551 to 466 in R23 single-core, a 15.4% gap. The i5-4690T achieves this with a 45W TDP and no ECC support, while the Xeon uses 80W and offers ECC. Users prioritizing raw compute throughput should choose the i5-4690T without hesitation. The Xeon E5640 is only the right pick for legacy server platforms requiring ECC memory, triple-channel bandwidth, or the Socket 1366 ecosystem, its benchmark performance is consistently behind.
Architecture Differences
The two processors stem from different Intel design eras. The Xeon E5640 uses the Westmere architecture on a 32nm process, with a die size of 239 mm² and 1,170 million transistors. The i5-4690T is built on Haswell at 22nm, packing 1,400 million transistors into a smaller 177 mm² die. This process shrink explains part of the i5’s efficiency and speed advantage.
Core and thread counts differ meaningfully. The Xeon has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the i5-4690T has 4 cores and 4 threads. Despite the Xeon’s hyper-threading advantage, the i5-4690T still wins all multi-threaded tests, indicating that Haswell’s per-core efficiency outweighs the Xeon’s extra threads. Cache allocations favor the Xeon: 12 MB shared L3 versus 6 MB shared L3 on the i5, though L1 and L2 are identical at 64 KB and 256 KB per core, respectively.
Memory architecture diverges sharply. The Xeon supports triple-channel DDR3 with ECC, while the i5-4690T runs dual-channel DDR3 without ECC, with a specified memory bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s. PCIe generations also differ: the Xeon offers Gen 2, while the i5-4690T provides Gen 3 with 16 CPU-only lanes. The i5-4690T also integrates Intel HD 4600 graphics, whereas the Xeon has no integrated graphics. The Xeon targets the server/workstation segment, while the i5 is a desktop part, and their release dates reflect this: March 2010 for the Xeon versus April 2014 for the i5.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
Every benchmark in the head-to-head set goes to the i5-4690T, with margins hovering near 15.4–15.6%. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i5 scores 393 against the Xeon’s 332, a 15.5% edge. Moving to R20 multi-core, the i5 posts 1640 versus 1387, a 15.4% win. The R20 single-core test shows the i5 at 231 and the Xeon at 195, a 15.6% margin, the largest relative gap in the set.
Cinebench R23 multi-core repeats the pattern: i5-4690T at 3905, Xeon at 3303, a 15.4% difference. Single-core R23 gives the i5 a 551-to-466 win, another 15.4% margin. The consistency of these deltas is striking; the i5’s advantage is uniform across both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads, suggesting the architecture itself, not just core count, drives the performance gap. The Xeon’s 8 threads do not help it close the gap in any multi-core test, as the i5’s newer cores and higher boost clock compensate fully.
For context, the Xeon’s average benchmark score of 1137 places it near the i5-2550K (1136) and i5-3570T (1136), with a 0.1% delta against both. The i5-4690T’s average of 1129 sits alongside the i7-3612QM (1129) and i7-2720QM (1128). Both processors rank at the 32nd percentile among all CPUs, indicating they occupy a similar overall performance tier despite the i5’s head-to-head sweep.
Specification Differences
The two chips differ in nearly every measurable specification. The Xeon has a base clock of 2.67 GHz and a boost clock of 2.93 GHz, while the i5-4690T runs at 2.50 GHz base and boosts to 3.50 GHz. The i5’s higher boost clock contributes to its single-core wins. TDP favors the i5 significantly: 45W versus the Xeon’s 80W.
Socket compatibility is entirely different: the Xeon uses Intel Socket 1366, while the i5-4690T uses Socket 1150. Process technology also differs, with the Xeon on 32nm and the i5 on 22nm. Transistor counts and die sizes diverge: 1,170 million transistors on a 239 mm² die for the Xeon, versus 1,400 million on 177 mm² for the i5. L3 cache is 12 MB shared on the Xeon versus 6 MB shared on the i5.
Memory support sees the Xeon offer triple-channel DDR3 and ECC, while the i5 provides dual-channel DDR3 without ECC and a specified 25.6 GB/s bandwidth. PCIe capability differs: Gen 2 on the Xeon, Gen 3 with 16 CPU-only lanes on the i5. The i5 includes Intel HD 4600 integrated graphics; the Xeon has none. Market segment, release date, and part numbers all differ: server/workstation versus desktop, 2010-03-15 versus 2014-04-30, and SLBVC versus SR1QT. Neither processor is multiplier-unlocked.
FAQ
Q: Which processor wins in multi-threaded workloads?
A: The Intel Core i5-4690T wins all multi-threaded tests despite having 4 threads versus the Xeon’s 8. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i5 scores 3905 against the Xeon’s 3303, a 15.4% advantage.
Q: Does the Xeon’s ECC memory support make it faster?
A: No. The Xeon E5640 supports ECC memory, but it loses every benchmark to the i5-4690T, which lacks ECC support. ECC is a reliability feature, not a performance one.
Q: How do their single-core performances compare?
A: The i5-4690T leads in single-core tests by 15.4–15.6%. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 551 versus the Xeon’s 466, and in R20 single-core, 231 versus 195.
Q: What is the TDP difference?
A: The Xeon E5640 has an 80W TDP, while the i5-4690T has a 45W TDP. The i5 delivers higher performance at nearly half the power budget.
Q: Are these processors comparable in overall benchmark standing?
A: Yes. Both rank at the 32nd percentile among all CPUs. The Xeon’s average benchmark score is 1137, and the i5-4690T’s is 1129, placing them within 0.7% of each other on average despite the i5’s head-to-head sweep.
Q: Which processor has more cache?
A: The Xeon E5640 has 12 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i5-4690T has 6 MB. Both have identical L1 (64 KB per core) and L2 (256 KB per core) caches.
Where Each One Wins
The i5-4690T wins every measured benchmark, so its use cases are straightforward: any application where Cinebench scores are representative. It wins multi-core workloads like rendering or video encoding, posting 393 in R15 multi-core versus 332 for the Xeon, and 1640 in R20 multi-core versus 1387. Single-threaded tasks also favor the i5, with R23 single-core at 551 versus 466. Its 45W TDP makes it suitable for compact or power-conscious desktop builds, and the integrated Intel HD 4600 graphics eliminate the need for a discrete GPU in basic systems. The Gen 3 PCIe support with 16 CPU-only lanes also benefits modern expansion cards.
The Xeon E5640’s wins are not in benchmarks but in specific hardware features. It is the only one of the two with ECC memory support, making it the choice for error-correcting memory in server or workstation environments where data integrity matters more than raw speed. Its triple-channel memory bus provides broader bandwidth potential than the i5’s dual-channel setup, though the i5 still wins all CPU tests. The Xeon also offers 12 MB of L3 cache, double the i5’s 6 MB, which could help in cache-sensitive workloads, but no benchmark in the data confirms this advantage. Its Socket 1366 platform may be the only option for users with existing boards from that era, and its server/workstation market segment aligns with reliability-focused builds. For pure performance, the i5-4690T is the definitive choice; the Xeon’s appeal rests entirely on ECC, memory channels, and legacy platform compatibility.