Intel Core i5-5257U vs Intel Xeon X5570 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon X5570 has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core i5-5257U has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Core i5-5257U records an average benchmark score of 976, and the Xeon X5570 records 967. The two chips are nearly identical on aggregate, with the i5 ahead by less than 1%.

Q: What is the difference in manufacturing process?

A: The Core i5-5257U is built on Intel's 14 nm process with 1,900 million transistors on a 133 mm² die. The Xeon X5570 uses Intel's 45 nm process with 731 million transistors on a 263 mm² die.

Q: Does the Xeon support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Xeon X5570 supports ECC memory. The Core i5-5257U does not support ECC memory.

Q: What are their market segments?

A: The Core i5-5257U targets the mobile market, while the Xeon X5570 targets the server and workstation segment.

Q: What is the release date gap between these two chips?

A: The Xeon X5570 was released on 2009-03-29, and the Core i5-5257U was released on 2015-02-28, a gap of roughly six years.

Architecture Differences

The Core i5-5257U and Xeon X5570 come from two very different Intel design eras, and the architectural gap is stark. The i5-5257U uses the Broadwell-U architecture on a 14 nm process node. That process packs 1,900 million transistors into a 133 mm² die. The Xeon X5570, by contrast, uses the Nehalem architecture (codename Gainestown) on a 45 nm node, with only 731 million transistors spread across a much larger 263 mm² die.

The core counts differ significantly. The i5-5257U is a dual-core part with 4 threads, while the Xeon X5570 is a quad-core part with 8 threads. Both chips share the same per-core L1 cache of 64 KB and per-core L2 cache of 256 KB. The shared L3 cache, however, is not equal: the i5-5257U has 3 MB of shared L3, while the Xeon X5570 has 8 MB of shared L3. That larger cache, combined with double the cores, gives the Xeon a structural advantage in heavily threaded workloads.

Memory architecture also differs. Both support DDR3, but the i5-5257U uses a dual-channel memory bus with 29.9 GB/s of bandwidth. The Xeon X5570 uses a triple-channel bus with 32.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the i5. The i5-5257U includes integrated Intel Iris 6100 graphics; the Xeon has no integrated graphics at all.

PCI Express support also separates the two. The i5-5257U provides Gen 2 with 12 lanes from the CPU. The Xeon X5570 lists Gen 2 PCIe support without a lane count in the database. The sockets are incompatible: the i5 uses Intel BGA 1168, while the Xeon uses Intel Socket 1366. Clock speeds favor the Xeon, which has a 2.93 GHz base clock and 3.33 GHz boost clock versus the i5's 2.70 GHz base and 3.10 GHz boost. Thermal design power is also very different: the i5-5257U is rated at 28 W, the Xeon X5570 at 95 W.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark data is unambiguous: the Xeon X5570 wins all five recorded tests. The margin is consistent, hovering around 14.4% to 14.5% in every workload.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 283 against the i5-5257U's 242, a 14.5% lead. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows a similar gap: the Xeon posts 1180, the i5 posts 1010, a 14.4% difference. The single-core results are just as lopsided. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the Xeon scores 166 versus the i5's 142, a 14.5% advantage. Cinebench R23 single-core gives the Xeon 396 and the i5 339, again a 14.4% gap. The R23 multi-core test completes the sweep: Xeon 2810, i5 2406, a 14.4% margin.

The consistency of these deltas is notable. Across all five tests, the Xeon leads by almost exactly the same percentage. That uniformity suggests the advantage is not workload-specific but rather a systematic performance edge. The Xeon's higher clock speeds, 2.93 GHz base and 3.33 GHz boost, combined with 4 cores and 8 threads, explain the multi-core wins. The single-core wins are more interesting: the Xeon's older Nehalem architecture still manages to beat the newer Broadwell core on a per-thread basis, thanks to its higher clocks.

The i5-5257U does not win a single head-to-head benchmark in the database. Its best relative showing is in the aggregate, where its average score of 976 edges out the Xeon's 967. That is a reversal of the individual test results, driven by the i5's additional Geekbench scores in the database. The i5 records Geekbench multi-core of 1773 and single-core of 922, tests that the Xeon does not have recorded.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every major specification line. Core count: 2 for the i5-5257U, 4 for the Xeon X5570. Threads: 4 versus 8. Base clock: 2.70 GHz versus 2.93 GHz. Boost clock: 3.10 GHz versus 3.33 GHz. TDP: 28 W versus 95 W.

Process node: 14 nm versus 45 nm. Transistor count: 1,900 million versus 731 million. Die size: 133 mm² versus 263 mm². L3 cache: 3 MB shared versus 8 MB shared. Memory bus: dual-channel versus triple-channel. Memory bandwidth: 29.9 GB/s versus 32.0 GB/s. ECC support: no versus yes.

Socket: Intel BGA 1168 versus Intel Socket 1366. Integrated graphics: Intel Iris 6100 versus none. Market segment: Mobile versus Server/Workstation. Part number: SR26K versus SLBF3. The i5-5257U has a launch MSRP of $315; the Xeon X5570 has a launch MSRP of $1386.

The two chips share some traits. Both are Intel products, both support DDR3 memory, both use per-core L1 and L2 caches of identical size, both are locked (multiplier unlocked: false), both are end-of-life, and both sit at the 26th percentile among all CPUs in the database. Neither supports 3D V-Cache, and both have no series designation listed.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon X5570 wins in raw compute. Every Cinebench test in the head-to-head comparison goes to the Xeon, with a consistent 14.4% to 14.5% margin. That includes both multi-core and single-core workloads. For users running Cinebench-style rendering tasks, the Xeon is the clear choice. Its 4 cores and 8 threads provide higher throughput in multi-threaded rendering, and its higher clock speeds give it an edge even on single-threaded tasks. The Xeon also offers ECC memory support, which is a meaningful feature for server and workstation environments where data integrity matters.

The Xeon's 8 MB of shared L3 cache is more than double the i5-5257U's 3 MB. That larger cache can help in workloads with significant data reuse. The triple-channel memory bus provides 32.0 GB/s of bandwidth, slightly ahead of the i5's dual-channel 29.9 GB/s. These features position the Xeon as the stronger processor for sustained, multi-threaded compute in a server or workstation chassis, despite its much higher 95 W TDP.

The Core i5-5257U wins in efficiency and platform integration. Its 28 W TDP is a fraction of the Xeon's 95 W, making it suitable for thin-and-light mobile devices. The integrated Intel Iris 6100 graphics means the i5 can drive a display without a separate GPU, something the Xeon cannot do. The i5 also uses a much newer 14 nm process, which contributes to its lower power draw and smaller die footprint.

The i5's average benchmark score of 976 is slightly higher than the Xeon's 967, and its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-4150T and Core i3-4130, both within 0.1% of its score. The Xeon's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 3700U and Intel Core i5-2400S, also within 0.1%. In the aggregate, the i5 is marginally ahead, but the margin is negligible in real-world terms.

For mobile users who need a low-power chip with graphics and moderate compute, the i5-5257U is the practical pick. For server or workstation users who prioritize multi-threaded rendering performance, ECC memory, and memory bandwidth, the Xeon X5570 is the stronger option. The data clearly favors the Xeon in compute, but the i5's efficiency and integrated graphics give it a distinct role in the mobile segment.