Intel Core i5-5675C vs Intel Xeon E3-1241 v3 Comparison

The Intel Core i5-5675C and the Intel Xeon E3-1241 v3 are both Intel Socket 1150 processors aimed at different segments of the market, yet they end up as direct competitors in benchmark databases. The data shows that the Xeon E3-1241 v3 is the clear performance winner across every single benchmark test, but the i5-5675C brings features to the table that the Xeon simply lacks. This comparison breaks down their head-to-head results, architectural differences, and what each processor is genuinely best suited for.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are unusually one-sided. The Intel Xeon E3-1241 v3 wins all six head-to-head comparisons, with the i5-5675C trailing by roughly 19% in every single test. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Xeon scores 612 against the i5's 495, a deltaPct of -19.1%. The single-core R15 test tells the same story: Xeon at 86, i5 at 69, a -19.8% gap. This pattern holds steady across newer Cinebench versions. In R20 multicore, the Xeon posts 2550 versus 2063 (-19.1%), and in R20 single-core it's 359 versus 291 (-18.9%). The R23 results continue the trend with the Xeon at 6072 multicore and 857 single-core, against the i5's 4912 and 693, both showing a -19.1% delta.

The Geekbench results are only available for the i5-5675C in the data, showing a multicore score of 4159 and a single-core score of 1388, but the Cinebench suite provides a complete picture. What's notable is that the Xeon's advantage is remarkably consistent, hovering right around the 19% mark across both multicore and single-core workloads. This suggests the performance gap isn't workload-specific; it's a fundamental throughput difference. The Xeon's higher base clock of 3.50 GHz versus the i5's 3.10 GHz, and its boost clock of 3.90 GHz versus 3.60 GHz, contribute to this, but the bigger factor is likely the Xeon's 8 threads versus the i5's 4 threads.

Interestingly, the average benchmark scores for these two CPUs are nearly identical when looking at their nearest rivals. The i5-5675C has an avgBenchmarkScore of 1759, while the Xeon E3-1241 v3 sits at 1756. Their nearestRivals lists actually include each other, with the i5 showing a deltaPct of 0.2% against the Xeon, and the Xeon showing -0.2% against the i5. This means that while the Xeon dominates the Cinebench tests, the overall benchmark average across all tests is essentially a tie. The i5's Geekbench scores, which are absent for the Xeon, likely pull its average up to parity.

The Verdict

From the data, the Intel Xeon E3-1241 v3 is the outright performance pick. It wins every benchmark where both are tested, and its lead is substantial and consistent. If your priority is raw compute throughput in Cinebench-style workloads, the Xeon is the only choice between these two. The i5-5675C never beats the Xeon in any head-to-head test, so there is no performance argument for choosing it based on these numbers alone.

The Intel Core i5-5675C, however, has one massive advantage: its integrated Iris Pro Graphics 6200. The Xeon E3-1241 v3 has no integrated graphics at all, meaning it requires a discrete GPU just to display an image. The i5's integrated graphics make it a viable option for a system without a dedicated graphics card, which is a feature the Xeon cannot offer. The i5 also has an unlocked multiplier, while the Xeon is locked. Both are on the same socket, but the i5 offers overclocking potential that the Xeon simply doesn't have.

The production status also matters. The i5-5675C is listed as "Active," while the Xeon E3-1241 v3 is "End-of-life." Depending on availability, the i5 is likely easier to source new. The Xeon also carries ECC memory support, which the i5 lacks, making it a better option for systems where data integrity is critical. For a builder who needs ECC RAM or already has a discrete GPU, the Xeon is the obvious pick. For a builder who wants a simple, single-chip solution with the option to overclock, the i5 is the only one that fits.

Architecture Differences

The two CPUs represent different Intel microarchitectures and manufacturing processes. The i5-5675C is built on Broadwell, using a 14 nm process node, while the Xeon E3-1241 v3 is a Haswell part on a 22 nm process. This is a significant generational shift; the i5 uses a smaller, more modern transistor node. The i5's die size is 182 mm², whereas the Xeon's is 160 mm². Interestingly, the Xeon's transistor count is listed at 1,400 million, while the i5's transistor count is not provided in the data.

The cache configurations differ notably. Both have 64 KB of L1 cache and 256 KB of L2 cache per core, but the L3 cache is where they diverge. The i5-5675C has 4 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Xeon E3-1241 v3 has 8 MB of shared L3 cache. This double-sized L3 cache on the Xeon is a meaningful architectural advantage, especially for workloads with large working sets that can fit in cache. The Xeon's extra L3 cache, combined with its higher clocks and 8 threads, explains its consistent benchmark lead.

The i5's Broadwell architecture brings the integrated Iris Pro Graphics 6200, which is a major feature difference since the Xeon's Haswell design omits integrated graphics entirely. The process node difference also means the i5 has a lower TDP of 65 watts compared to the Xeon's 80 watts, despite the i5 having a larger die. The Xeon's architecture is also branded for server/workstation use, while the i5 is clearly a desktop part.

Specification Differences

The core counts are identical at 4 cores each, but the thread counts differ: the i5-5675C has 4 threads, while the Xeon E3-1241 v3 has 8 threads. This is the single most important specification difference for multithreaded performance. The Xeon's base clock is 3.50 GHz versus the i5's 3.10 GHz, and its boost clock is 3.90 GHz versus the i5's 3.60 GHz. The Xeon is faster in both metrics.

The TDP differs, with the i5 at 65 watts and the Xeon at 80 watts. Both use the same Intel Socket 1150 and support dual-channel DDR3 memory with a bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s. The i5 has a launch MSRP of $276, while the Xeon's launch MSRP was $273. The i5 supports ECC memory as false, while the Xeon supports it as true. The i5 has an unlocked multiplier, the Xeon does not. The i5 includes integrated graphics, the Xeon does not. The release dates are also different: the i5 launched on 2015-05-14, while the Xeon launched earlier on 2014-05-10.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has a higher single-core performance?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1241 v3 wins all single-core benchmarks. In Cinebench R15 single-core, it scores 86 versus the i5-5675C's 69, a delta of -19.8%. In R20, it scores 359 versus 291 (-18.9%), and in R23, it scores 857 versus 693 (-19.1%).

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-5675C have integrated graphics?

A: Yes. The i5-5675C includes Iris Pro Graphics 6200. The Xeon E3-1241 v3 does not have any integrated graphics, so it requires a discrete GPU to output video.

Q: Can the Xeon E3-1241 v3 support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Xeon E3-1241 v3 has ECC memory support. The i5-5675C does not support ECC memory, as indicated by the eccMemory field being false for the i5 and true for the Xeon.

Q: What is the difference in their average benchmark scores?

A: The i5-5675C has an avgBenchmarkScore of 1759, and the Xeon E3-1241 v3 has an avgBenchmarkScore of 1756. The difference is minimal, with the i5 showing a deltaPct of 0.2% over the Xeon in the nearestRivals data.

Q: Which CPU is newer?

A: The Intel Core i5-5675C was released on 2015-05-14, while the Intel Xeon E3-1241 v3 was released on 2014-05-10. The i5 is the newer part by about a year.

Q: Do both CPUs use the same socket?

A: Yes, both the Intel Core i5-5675C and the Intel Xeon E3-1241 v3 use the Intel Socket 1150. They are physically compatible with the same motherboards, though BIOS support may vary.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon E3-1241 v3 wins every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison. It is the superior processor for any workload that benefits from higher clock speeds and more threads. The data shows a consistent ~19% lead across all Cinebench tests, making it the clear choice for rendering, video encoding, or any multithreaded compute task. Its ECC memory support also makes it the correct pick for a workstation or server where data corruption is unacceptable. The Xeon's 8 threads and 8 MB of L3 cache give it a structural advantage that the i5 cannot overcome in these tests.

The Intel Core i5-5675C wins in scenarios the benchmarks don't cover. Its integrated Iris Pro Graphics 6200 means it can run a full system without a discrete GPU, something the Xeon cannot do at all. This makes the i5 the only viable option for a compact, low-power desktop build where a dedicated graphics card would be overkill or impossible to fit. Its unlocked multiplier also gives the i5 an edge for overclocking, allowing users to potentially close the performance gap with the Xeon through manual tuning, though the data doesn't include overclocked results. The i5's lower 65-watt TDP also makes it more attractive for power-sensitive builds.

In the end, the Xeon is the performance king in every tested metric, while the i5 is the feature-rich alternative that offers integrated graphics and overclocking. The choice comes down to whether you need raw compute power or a versatile, all-in-one chip. The data is unambiguous: the Xeon is faster, but the i5 is more flexible.