Intel Core i5-7300HQ vs Intel Xeon E3-1505L v5 Comparison

The Intel Core i5-7300HQ and Intel Xeon E3-1505L v5 are both 14nm quad-core mobile processors on the Intel BGA 1440 socket, yet the benchmark data shows a decisive and consistent victory for the Xeon part. The Xeon E3-1505L v5 wins all six head-to-head benchmarks, with a performance margin that hovers near 14% across the board. The average benchmark scores are nearly identical—1448 for the i5 and 1446 for the Xeon—placing both in the 38th percentile of all CPUs, but the distribution of wins reveals a clear hierarchy in threaded and single-threaded workloads alike.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking pattern in the head-to-head data is the uniformity of the Xeon's advantage. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Xeon scores 503 against the i5's 434, a delta of -13.7% for the i5. The single-core R15 test shows a similar story: 71 for the Xeon versus 61 for the i5, a -14.1% gap. This is not a case where one chip wins on multi-threading and the other on single-core; the Xeon leads in both disciplines, which is unusual for a comparison between a consumer mobile chip and a low-power Xeon.

The Cinebench R20 results reinforce the trend. The Xeon posts 2099 in multicore, while the i5 manages 1812, again a -13.7% difference. Single-core R20 scores are 296 and 255 respectively, a -13.9% gap. Moving to Cinebench R23, the Xeon's multicore score of 4999 eclipses the i5's 4316 (-13.7%), and the single-core score of 705 beats 609 (-13.6%). The deltas are so consistent—ranging only from -13.6% to -14.1%—that the performance relationship between the two chips appears fixed across all tested workloads.

The Geekbench results, which are only available for the i5, show scores of 3044 multicore and 1052 single-core. These are not directly comparable to the Xeon's missing Geekbench data, but they provide context for the i5's overall standing. The i5's average benchmark score of 1448 is a hair above the Xeon's 1446, but that 0.1% difference is meaningless given the Xeon's sweep of the head-to-head tests. The nearest rival data confirms the closeness: the Xeon lists the i5 as a rival with a deltaPct of -0.1%, while the i5 lists the Xeon with a deltaPct of 0.2%. These are rounding errors, not performance statements.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon E3-1505L v5 wins every single benchmark in the head-to-head comparison. There is no workload category in the data where the i5-7300HQ comes out ahead. The Xeon's advantage is slightly larger in single-core tests (ranging from -13.6% to -14.1%) than in multicore tests (a flat -13.7% across all three Cinebench versions). This suggests the Xeon's higher per-core efficiency, despite its lower base and boost clocks, is the deciding factor.

The i5-7300HQ's only "win" is in the field of clock speed specifications: it has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 3.50 GHz, compared to the Xeon's 2000.00 MHz base and 2.80 GHz boost. Yet these higher clocks do not translate into benchmark victories. The i5 also has a higher TDP of 45 watts versus the Xeon's 25 watts, which typically implies greater sustained performance headroom, but the data shows the opposite outcome. For users prioritizing raw benchmark scores, the Xeon is the only choice. For users prioritizing lower power draw, the Xeon wins again with its 25-watt TDP.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different Intel microarchitectures. The i5-7300HQ is built on Kaby Lake (codename Kaby Lake-H), while the Xeon E3-1505L v5 uses Skylake (codename Skylake-H). Both are manufactured on Intel's 14nm process node, and both use the Intel BGA 1440 socket. The die sizes are nearly identical—126 mm² for the i5 and 122 mm² for the Xeon—but the Xeon's transistor count is listed at 2,300 million, while the i5's is not provided.

The most significant architectural difference is in thread count. The i5 has 4 cores and 4 threads, making it a pure quad-core without hyper-threading. The Xeon also has 4 cores but 8 threads, giving it simultaneous multithreading capability. This explains the Xeon's multicore advantage, though it does not fully explain its single-core lead. Cache configurations also differ: both have 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core, but the Xeon's L3 cache is 8 MB shared versus the i5's 6 MB shared.

Memory support is identical in terms of types (DDR3, DDR4) and bus (dual-channel), but the Xeon lists a memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s while the i5 does not specify one. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, a feature absent from the i5. PCIe connectivity is the same: Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics differ, with the i5 featuring Intel HD Graphics 630 and the Xeon using HD Graphics P530. The Xeon's market segment is "Server/Workstation" while the i5 is "Mobile," which aligns with the Xeon's ECC support and 25-watt TDP.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i5-7300HQ has a boost clock of 3.50 GHz, which is higher than the Xeon E3-1505L v5's boost clock of 2.80 GHz.

Q: Does the Xeon E3-1505L v5 support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Xeon E3-1505L v5 supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core i5-7300HQ does not.

Q: How much larger is the Xeon's L3 cache compared to the i5?

A: The Xeon E3-1505L v5 has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Core i5-7300HQ has 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which CPU has more threads?

A: The Xeon E3-1505L v5 has 8 threads, while the Intel Core i5-7300HQ has 4 threads. Both have 4 cores.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of each CPU?

A: The Intel Core i5-7300HQ has a launch MSRP of $250, and the Intel Xeon E3-1505L v5 has a launch MSRP of $433.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel Core i5-7300HQ has an average benchmark score of 1448, while the Intel Xeon E3-1505L v5 has an average score of 1446, a difference of 0.2%.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i5-7300HQ | Intel Xeon E3-1505L v5 |

|----------------|-----------------------|-------------------------|

| Threads | 4 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 2.50 GHz | 2000.00 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.50 GHz | 2.80 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 25 W |

| Architecture | Kaby Lake | Skylake |

| Codename | Kaby Lake-H | Skylake-H |

| Generation | Core i5 (Kaby Lake-H) | Xeon E3 (Skylake-H) |

| Transistors | Not specified | 2,300 million |

| Die Size | 126 mm² | 122 mm² |

| L3 Cache | 6 MB (shared) | 8 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not specified | 34.1 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel HD Graphics 630 | HD Graphics P530 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Server/Workstation |

| Release Date | 2017-01-02 | 2015-10-26 |

| Launch MSRP | $250 | $433 |

| Part Number | SR32S | SR2E0 |

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon E3-1505L v5 is the superior processor in every measured benchmark. It wins all six head-to-head tests, with deltas ranging from -13.6% to -14.1% against the i5-7300HQ. The Xeon achieves this while consuming nearly half the power (25 watts versus 45 watts) and carrying a larger L3 cache (8 MB versus 6 MB). The Xeon's 8 threads versus the i5's 4 threads explain its multicore edge, but its single-core advantage—despite a lower boost clock—demonstrates that architectural efficiency outweighs raw clock speed in this matchup.

The i5-7300HQ should only be considered by users who require the higher boost clock of 3.50 GHz or who need the integrated Intel HD Graphics 630. The i5's higher TDP of 45 watts suggests it may sustain boost clocks longer in a properly cooled chassis, but the benchmark results do not support that hypothesis. The i5's 0.2% higher average benchmark score (1448 versus 1446) is statistically negligible and does not offset a single head-to-head loss.

The Xeon E3-1505L v5 is the clear pick for workstation or server use, given its ECC memory support, lower power draw, and consistent 14% performance lead. It is also the better choice for mobile users who prioritize performance per watt. The i5-7300HQ, despite its higher clock speeds, simply cannot match the Xeon's throughput in any of the six Cinebench tests. The verdict is straightforward: choose the Xeon for performance, choose the i5 only if the specific feature set—such as the HD Graphics 630 or the higher boost clock—is non-negotiable.