Intel Core i5-7500 vs Intel Xeon Gold 5318N Comparison

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the Intel Xeon Gold 5318N in multi-core rendering workloads?

A: The Xeon Gold 5318N leads by a wide margin in multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 29155 versus 5133 for the Core i5-7500, a 468% advantage. The R20 multi-core result shows a similar gap: 12245 versus 2155, also a 468.2% difference.

Q: Does the Xeon Gold 5318N also win in single-core benchmarks?

A: Yes, it wins every single-core test recorded. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Xeon scores 4116 compared to the Core i5-7500's 724, a 468.5% lead. The R15 single-core test shows 414 versus 72, a 475% difference.

Q: Which processor has a higher base clock speed?

A: The Core i5-7500 has a higher base clock at 3.40 GHz, while the Xeon Gold 5318N operates at 2.10 GHz. The Core i5 also boosts higher at 3.80 GHz versus 3.40 GHz for the Xeon.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for these two CPUs?

A: The Xeon Gold 5318N has 24 cores and 48 threads. The Core i5-7500 has 4 cores and 4 threads. The Xeon offers six times the core count and twelve times the thread count.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Xeon Gold 5318N supports ECC memory, while the Core i5-7500 does not. The Xeon also uses an eight-channel memory bus compared to the Core i5's dual-channel configuration.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Xeon Gold 5318N records an average benchmark score of 8433, compared to 8208 for the Core i5-7500. Both sit at the 64th percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural eras and market segments. The Xeon Gold 5318N uses the Ice Lake-SP architecture, built on a 10 nm process node from Intel. It targets the server and workstation market, with 24 cores and 48 threads. The Core i5-7500 uses the older Kaby Lake architecture on a 14 nm node, and it is positioned as a desktop part with 4 cores and 4 threads.

The cache hierarchies differ substantially. The Xeon Gold 5318N provides 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 cache per core, with 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core i5-7500 also has 64 KB of L1 per core, but only 256 KB of L2 per core and 6 MB of shared L3. The Xeon's total L3 cache is six times larger, which matters for workloads that repeatedly access large data sets.

Memory architecture also separates these parts. The Xeon Gold 5318N supports DDR4 memory over an eight-channel bus, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 170.7 GB/s. The Core i5-7500 supports DDR4 over a dual-channel bus, with a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. That is a 4.4x gap in theoretical bandwidth, and the Xeon additionally supports ECC memory, making it suitable for error-sensitive server workloads. The Core i5 does not support ECC and instead includes integrated graphics in the form of HD 630, a feature absent from the Xeon.

PCIe capabilities also differ. The Xeon Gold 5318N provides Gen 4 with 64 lanes from the CPU, while the Core i5-7500 provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes. The Xeon's lane count and newer generation allow for many more expansion devices or accelerators, and the higher bandwidth per lane matters for storage and networking. The sockets reflect the platform split: the Xeon uses Intel Socket 4189, while the Core i5 uses Intel Socket 1151.

Production status is listed as Active for both, but the release dates are far apart. The Core i5-7500 came out in January 2017, and the Xeon Gold 5318N arrived in April 2021. The process node difference, 10 nm versus 14 nm, is consistent with the newer Xeon design despite its much higher core count.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head benchmark data covers six Cinebench tests, and the Xeon Gold 5318N wins all six. The largest single delta appears in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Xeon leads by 468.5%. The smallest delta is in R23 multi-core at 468%, which is still a massive gap.

Looking at multi-core results, the Xeon Gold 5318N scores 2938 in Cinebench R15 multi-core versus 517 for the Core i5-7500, a 468.3% difference. In R20 multi-core, the Xeon scores 12245 versus 2155, a 468.2% lead. In R23 multi-core, the scores are 29155 and 5133, a 468% difference. The pattern is consistent across Cinebench generations, which suggests the Xeon's advantage is structural rather than test-specific.

Single-core results tell a similar story. The Xeon Gold 5318N scores 414 in R15 single-core, 1728 in R20 single-core, and 4116 in R23 single-core. The Core i5-7500 scores 72, 304, and 724 respectively. The deltas are 475%, 468.4%, and 468.5%. Even in workloads that typically favor higher clock speeds, the Xeon wins, despite its lower base and boost clocks. The Core i5-7500's higher clock speeds, 3.40 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost, do not translate into a single-core win.

The Core i5-7500 has additional benchmark entries in the database, including Geekbench and Passmark tests, but the head-to-head comparison only includes Cinebench. In those six tests, the win count is 6 for the Xeon and 0 for the Core i5. The data shows no workload in this comparison where the desktop part pulls ahead.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification category. Core count: 24 versus 4. Thread count: 48 versus 4. Base clock: 2.10 GHz versus 3.40 GHz. Boost clock: 3.40 GHz versus 3.80 GHz. TDP: 150 W versus 65 W. The Xeon draws more power, but that is expected given its core count and server positioning.

Cache: the Xeon has 1 MB L2 per core versus 256 KB per core, and 36 MB shared L3 versus 6 MB. Memory bus: eight-channel versus dual-channel. Memory bandwidth: 170.7 GB/s versus 38.4 GB/s. ECC support: yes versus no. PCIe: Gen 4 with 64 lanes versus Gen 3 with 16 lanes. Integrated graphics: none versus HD 630. Socket: Intel Socket 4189 versus Intel Socket 1151. Architecture: Ice Lake versus Kaby Lake. Process node: 10 nm versus 14 nm. Market segment: Server/Workstation versus Desktop. Release date: April 2021 versus January 2017. The Core i5 has a part number listed as SR335; the Xeon does not have a part number in the database.

Both processors have locked multipliers, so neither is designed for overclocking. Both support DDR4 memory, but the channel configurations and bandwidth figures are far apart. The Xeon is built for scale, the Core i5 for a conventional desktop socket.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split by use case. The Xeon Gold 5318N dominates every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, with deltas of roughly 468% to 475% across all six Cinebench tests. It has 24 cores, 48 threads, an eight-channel memory bus, 170.7 GB/s of memory bandwidth, ECC support, and PCIe Gen 4 with 64 lanes. That combination is aimed at server and workstation workloads where throughput, memory capacity, and reliability matter.

The Core i5-7500 is a desktop part with 4 cores, 4 threads, a dual-channel memory bus, 38.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth, no ECC, and PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes. Its higher clock speeds, 3.40 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost, do not overcome the Xeon's architectural advantages in the recorded benchmarks. It does include integrated graphics, which the Xeon lacks, so a system built around the Core i5 could run without a discrete GPU.

The average benchmark scores are close, 8433 for the Xeon versus 8208 for the Core i5, and both are at the 64th percentile. But that average includes a broader set of tests for the Core i5, including Geekbench and Passmark entries. The head-to-head Cinebench results are one-sided. For anyone choosing between these two, the decision depends on the platform: the Xeon requires a Socket 4189 server board, the Core i5 fits Socket 1151. The Xeon is the choice for multi-threaded, memory-intensive, or ECC-required environments. The Core i5 is the choice for a low-power desktop build with integrated graphics and modest compute demands.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon Gold 5318N wins in all six head-to-head benchmark categories, so its strengths are easy to map. Multi-core rendering: 468% ahead in R23 multi-core, 468.2% in R20, 468.3% in R15. Single-core rendering: 468.5% ahead in R23, 468.4% in R20, 475% in R15. The Xeon also wins on memory bandwidth, 170.7 GB/s versus 38.4 GB/s, and on PCIe capabilities, Gen 4 with 64 lanes versus Gen 3 with 16 lanes. ECC memory support gives it an edge for data integrity in server workloads. Its 24 cores and 48 threads make it the obvious pick for virtualization, database serving, and compute-heavy batch jobs.

The Core i5-7500 has no wins in the head-to-head benchmarks, but it does hold advantages in several specification areas. It has a higher base clock, 3.40 GHz versus 2.10 GHz, and a higher boost clock, 3.80 GHz versus 3.40 GHz. It has a much lower TDP, 65 W versus 150 W, which means less heat and potentially simpler cooling. It includes integrated graphics, HD 630, so a basic desktop system does not need a separate GPU. It uses the widely available Socket 1151 platform, and it was released earlier, in January 2017 compared to April 2021 for the Xeon. For a desktop user who values lower power draw, integrated graphics, and a mainstream socket, the Core i5 remains a functional choice. For raw performance, the database shows no contest: the Xeon Gold 5318N wins every recorded test.