Intel Core i5-7600 vs Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a strikingly consistent picture: the Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 wins every single head-to-head test in the database, and it does so by nearly identical margins. Across all six Cinebench comparisons, the Xeon leads the Core i5-7600 by roughly 11 percent in both single-core and multi-core workloads. This uniformity is unusual; most processor matchups show varying deltas depending on whether the workload scales with thread count or relies on raw clock speed.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 633 against the Core i5's 563, a delta of 11.1 percent. The single-core result in the same test shows 89 versus 79, a slightly larger gap of 11.2 percent. Moving to Cinebench R20, the Xeon posts 2639 multi-core and 372 single-core, while the Core i5 manages 2348 and 331 respectively, both deltas sitting at exactly 11 percent. The newest test in the database, Cinebench R23, repeats the pattern: 6284 versus 5591 in multi-core and 887 versus 789 in single-core, again 11 percent apart.

What is noteworthy is the consistency of the margin. The Xeon does not merely edge out the Core i5 in one specific test; it establishes a uniform performance advantage across every recorded metric. The data suggests a fundamental throughput difference rather than a workload-specific quirk. The average benchmark score for the Xeon is 1817, while the Core i5 sits at 1844, which appears contradictory at first glance. However, the Core i5's average includes Geekbench results, where it records 3704 multi-core and 1344 single-core, tests that the Xeon does not have entries for in this database. The head-to-head Cinebench results remain the cleanest comparison, and they uniformly favor the Xeon.

Where Each One Wins

The short answer from the recorded data is that the Xeon E3-1505M v5 wins everywhere measured. There are zero head-to-head wins for the Core i5-7600 in the database; the Xeon claims all six. This is not a case of one chip excelling in multi-threaded tasks while the other takes single-threaded honors. The Xeon is faster in both categories, across all three Cinebench versions.

What does this imply for use cases? The Xeon's advantage in multi-core tests, such as R23's 6284 versus 5591, points to sustained throughput capabilities. The presence of 8 threads compared to the Core i5's 4 threads likely explains part of this, but the single-core wins (887 versus 789 in R23) indicate the Xeon also holds a clock-for-clock efficiency edge in this comparison, despite its lower base and boost clocks. The Core i5's higher boost clock of 4.10 GHz versus the Xeon's 3.70 GHz does not translate into a single-core win, which is a surprising result worth questioning. The architecture differences, detailed later, may account for this.

For workloads that are heavily single-threaded, the data still favors the Xeon, just by the same 11 percent margin. For parallel workloads, the Xeon's thread count advantage compounds the per-core advantage, yet the delta remains steady at 11 percent, suggesting the Xeon's efficiency per thread is the dominant factor rather than raw thread count scaling. The Core i5's only potential advantage lies outside the head-to-head benchmarks: its Geekbench scores are strong (3704 multi-core, 1344 single-core), but without corresponding Geekbench results for the Xeon, no direct comparison can be made from this database.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded benchmark data, the Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 is the superior processor. It wins every single comparison in the database, with a consistent 11 percent lead across single-core and multi-core Cinebench tests. Anyone prioritizing raw performance, whether for single-threaded responsiveness or multi-threaded rendering, should look to the Xeon based on these measurements.

The Core i5-7600 does have one notable advantage: its production status is listed as Active, while the Xeon is marked End-of-life. The Core i5 also uses the Intel Socket 1151, which is a desktop platform, whereas the Xeon uses Intel BGA 1440, typically a soldered mobile or embedded design. For a system builder looking at current availability and upgrade paths, the Core i5 may be the more practical choice despite its benchmark deficit. The Xeon's 45 W TDP versus the Core i5's 65 W also suggests the Xeon achieves its performance lead while consuming less power, a meaningful consideration for dense or thermally constrained systems.

The percentile rankings for both processors are identical at 42 percent, meaning they sit at the same position relative to all CPUs in the database. The Xeon's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-6600K at 1816 (0.1 percent lower), the Intel Xeon E5-1630 v3 at 1823 (0.3 percent higher), and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U at 1810 (0.4 percent lower). The Core i5's nearest rivals are the Intel Core i7-8706G at 1842 (0.1 percent lower), the AMD Athlon Gold PRO 3150G at 1836 (0.5 percent lower), and the AMD Ryzen 5 4600U at 1832 (0.7 percent lower). Both chips cluster within a tight performance band around 1800 to 1850 average score, so the 11 percent head-to-head gap is more meaningful than their similar percentile positions suggest.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i5-7600 has a boost clock of 4.10 GHz, while the Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 boosts to 3.70 GHz.

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

A: Yes, the Xeon supports ECC memory, while the Core i5-7600 does not.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The Core i5-7600 has a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, while the Xeon E3-1505M v5 has 34.1 GB/s. The Core i5 has a higher bandwidth figure.

Q: How many threads does each processor support?

A: The Core i5-7600 has 4 threads, while the Xeon E3-1505M v5 has 8 threads.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Xeon E3-1505M v5 has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core i5-7600 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the Xeon E3-1505M v5?

A: The launch MSRP is $434.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on Intel's 14 nm process node and use a dual-channel memory bus, but the underlying architectures diverge. The Core i5-7600 is based on Kaby Lake, while the Xeon E3-1505M v5 uses Skylake-H. The Core i5's codename is Kaby Lake, and its generation is listed as Core i5 (Kaby Lake). The Xeon's codename is Skylake-H, and its generation is Xeon E3 (Skylake-H).

The Xeon includes 2,300 million transistors on a 122 mm² die, while the Core i5's transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database. This suggests the Xeon is a more complex chip physically, which aligns with its additional features. Both have 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core, but the L3 cache differs: the Xeon has 8 MB shared, the Core i5 has 6 MB shared. The larger L3 cache on the Xeon may contribute to its consistent performance lead.

Memory support also differs. The Core i5 supports only DDR4, while the Xeon supports both DDR3 and DDR4. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, a feature absent from the Core i5. This makes the Xeon more suitable for error-sensitive workloads, a common requirement in server and workstation environments, which matches its market segment designation of Server/Workstation. The Core i5 is designated for Desktop use.

Both processors use PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The integrated graphics differ as well: the Core i5 includes HD 630, while the Xeon uses HD Graphics P530. The Xeon's process node, transistor count, and die size are explicit in the database, while the Core i5's corresponding fields are null, indicating that the Xeon's physical characteristics are more thoroughly documented.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across several key specification fields. The Core i5-7600 has a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz, while the Xeon E3-1505M v5 has a base clock of 2.80 GHz and a boost clock of 3.70 GHz. Despite the Core i5's higher clocks, the Xeon wins all benchmarks, a result that questions the direct relationship between clock speed and performance in this comparison.

Thermal design power differs significantly: the Core i5 is rated at 65 W, the Xeon at 45 W. The Xeon delivers its performance lead while drawing less power, a notable efficiency advantage. The socket types are incompatible: the Core i5 uses Intel Socket 1151, while the Xeon uses Intel BGA 1440. This means the two processors cannot be installed in the same motherboard.

The Core i5 supports DDR4 memory only, with a bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, while the Xeon supports DDR3 and DDR4, with a bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. ECC memory is supported only on the Xeon. The Core i5's release date is January 2, 2017, while the Xeon's is October 26, 2015. The production status differs: the Core i5 is Active, the Xeon is End-of-life. The market segments also differ, with the Core i5 aimed at Desktop and the Xeon at Server/Workstation.

The part numbers are distinct: SR334 for the Core i5, SR2FM for the Xeon. Both have 4 cores, but the Xeon has 8 threads versus the Core i5's 4. The integrated graphics differ (HD 630 versus HD Graphics P530). The Xeon has an explicit launch MSRP of $434, while the Core i5's launch MSRP is not recorded. No other specification differences are present in the database.