Intel Core i5-5257U vs Intel Xeon W5590 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a consistent, if not overwhelming, advantage for the Intel Xeon W5590 across all five shared Cinebench tests. The Xeon W5590 wins every head-to-head comparison, with margins that are remarkably uniform, falling between 19% and 19.2%. This consistency suggests the performance gap is rooted in fundamental architectural and specification differences rather than test-specific quirks.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Xeon W5590 scores 288 against the Core i5-5257U's 242, a 19% advantage. The pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multicore, where the Xeon reaches 1204 versus 1010 for the Core i5, a 19.2% difference. Single-core results follow the same trajectory: in Cinebench R20 single-core, the Xeon posts 169 against 142, again a 19% lead. Cinebench R23 multicore shows 2867 for the Xeon versus 2406 for the Core i5, and single-core R23 gives 404 against 339, both at a 19.2% delta. Across every metric, the older workstation chip outperforms the newer mobile part by roughly one-fifth.

The absence of a Geekbench result for the Xeon W5590 in the database means the Core i5-5257U's Geekbench scores (1773 multicore, 922 single-core) cannot be directly compared here. The average benchmark score tells a similar story: the Xeon W5590 averages 986, while the Core i5-5257U averages 976. These averages place both processors near the 26th and 27th percentiles of all CPUs respectively, indicating they occupy a similar tier of overall performance despite the Xeon's head-to-head sweep.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent distinct design philosophies and eras. The Xeon W5590 uses the Nehalem architecture, codenamed Gainestown, built on a 45 nm process. It contains 731 million transistors on a 263 mm² die. The Core i5-5257U uses Broadwell, codenamed Broadwell-U, on a 14 nm process with 1,900 million transistors on a much smaller 133 mm² die. The process shrink allowed Intel to pack nearly three times the transistor count into roughly half the die area.

Core counts differ substantially: the Xeon W5590 offers 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Core i5-5257U provides 2 cores and 4 threads. Both have identical per-core L1 and L2 cache configurations (64 KB and 256 KB per core), but the L3 cache differs greatly. The Xeon has 8 MB of shared L3, while the Core i5 has only 3 MB. Memory support also diverges: the Xeon uses triple-channel DDR3 with 32.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Core i5 uses dual-channel DDR3 with 29.9 GB/s. The Xeon supports ECC memory; the Core i5 does not.

The Xeon is a server and workstation part, using Intel Socket 1366, while the Core i5 is a mobile processor on Intel BGA 1168. The Xeon has no integrated graphics, whereas the Core i5 includes Intel Iris 6100. Both use PCIe Gen 2, but the Core i5's implementation is limited to 12 lanes from the CPU. The Xeon's market segment is Server/Workstation; the Core i5's is Mobile. Both are end-of-life products, but the Xeon launched in August 2009 and the Core i5 in February 2015, a gap of roughly five and a half years.

The thermal design power difference is extreme: the Xeon W5590 has a 130 W TDP, the Core i5-5257U a 28 W TDP. This reflects the Xeon's workstation heritage and the Core i5's mobile efficiency focus. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The Xeon's part number is SLBGE; the Core i5's is SR26K.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but context-dependent choice. For raw multi-threaded and single-threaded Cinebench performance, the Xeon W5590 wins every recorded test by roughly 19%. Its 4 cores and 8 threads, larger 8 MB L3 cache, and higher clock speeds (3.33 GHz base, 3.60 GHz boost) versus the Core i5's 2.70 GHz base and 3.10 GHz boost give it a consistent edge. The Xeon also offers ECC memory support, which matters for data-integrity workloads.

However, the Core i5-5257U is not without merit. Its 28 W TDP versus the Xeon's 130 W makes it far more suitable for power-constrained environments. It includes integrated graphics, which the Xeon lacks entirely. The Core i5's 14 nm process with 1,900 million transistors delivers modern efficiency, and its dual-channel memory bus, while narrower, still provides 29.9 GB/s of bandwidth, close to the Xeon's 32.0 GB/s. The Core i5 also launched six years later, meaning it benefits from architectural improvements in instruction handling and power management.

The average benchmark scores are nearly identical: 986 for the Xeon versus 976 for the Core i5. This suggests that in a broader benchmark suite, the two would trade blows, with the Xeon's extra cores helping in threaded workloads and the Core i5's newer architecture potentially helping in other areas. The database shows winsA equals 5 and winsB equals 0, but that only covers the five shared Cinebench tests. The Core i5 has a Geekbench result in the database that the Xeon lacks, indicating the data is incomplete for a full verdict.

For workstation or server tasks where power consumption is secondary and ECC support is required, the Xeon W5590 is the data-backed choice. For mobile or power-sensitive applications where integrated graphics and low heat output are priorities, the Core i5-5257U is the only option between these two, since the Xeon cannot operate in such environments at 130 W.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every core specification. The Xeon W5590 has 4 cores and 8 threads; the Core i5-5257U has 2 cores and 4 threads. Base clocks are 3.33 GHz versus 2.70 GHz, and boost clocks are 3.60 GHz versus 3.10 GHz. TDP is 130 W versus 28 W. Sockets are Intel Socket 1366 versus Intel BGA 1168. Architecture is Nehalem (Gainestown) versus Broadwell (Broadwell-U). Process node is 45 nm versus 14 nm. Transistor counts are 731 million versus 1,900 million. Die sizes are 263 mm² versus 133 mm².

L3 cache is 8 MB shared on the Xeon versus 3 MB shared on the Core i5. Memory bus is triple-channel versus dual-channel. Memory bandwidth is 32.0 GB/s versus 29.9 GB/s. ECC memory support is present on the Xeon, absent on the Core i5. PCIe is Gen 2 on both, but the Core i5 specifies 12 lanes from the CPU. Integrated graphics are absent on the Xeon, present as Intel Iris 6100 on the Core i5. Market segment is Server/Workstation versus Mobile. Release dates are August 2009 versus February 2015. Launch MSRP is $1600 for the Xeon and $315 for the Core i5. Part numbers are SLBGE versus SR26K.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon W5590 has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Intel Core i5-5257U has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: What is the performance difference in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The Xeon W5590 scores 2867, while the Core i5-5257U scores 2406. The Xeon leads by 19.2%.

Q: Does the Core i5-5257U have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it includes Intel Iris 6100. The Xeon W5590 has no integrated graphics.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Xeon W5590 supports ECC memory. The Core i5-5257U does not.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each?

A: The Xeon W5590 has an average benchmark score of 986. The Core i5-5257U has an average of 976.

Q: What is the TDP of each processor?

A: The Xeon W5590 has a TDP of 130 W. The Core i5-5257U has a TDP of 28 W.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon W5590 wins every shared benchmark in the database. Its advantages are concentrated in multi-threaded workloads, where its 4 cores and 8 threads outperform the Core i5's 2 cores and 4 threads by 19% in Cinebench R15 multicore and 19.2% in both R20 and R23 multicore. It also wins single-core tests by the same margin, indicating its higher clock speeds (3.33 GHz base, 3.60 GHz boost) provide a fundamental per-thread advantage. The Xeon's 8 MB L3 cache and triple-channel memory with 32.0 GB/s bandwidth support memory-intensive workstation tasks. ECC memory support makes it suitable for servers or workstations where data integrity is paramount.

The Core i5-5257U wins on efficiency and platform integration, though not on any recorded benchmark. Its 28 W TDP versus 130 W makes it viable for laptops and compact systems where the Xeon would require substantial cooling. The integrated Intel Iris 6100 graphics eliminate the need for a discrete GPU, which the Xeon cannot offer. The 14 nm process with 1,900 million transistors delivers modern power management. Its dual-channel memory at 29.9 GB/s is nearly comparable to the Xeon's triple-channel at 32.0 GB/s. The Core i5's Geekbench scores (1773 multicore, 922 single-core) exist in the database, but the Xeon has no Geekbench result, so no direct comparison is possible there.

In practical terms, the Xeon W5590 wins for users prioritizing raw compute in a workstation or server chassis with adequate power and cooling. The Core i5-5257U wins for mobile deployments or compact builds where power draw and heat dissipation are the limiting factors. The data shows no scenario where the Core i5 outpaces the Xeon in Cinebench, but its lower TDP and integrated graphics make it the only choice for fanless or battery-powered designs. Users needing ECC memory must select the Xeon, as the Core i5 lacks this feature entirely.