Intel Core i5-7600K vs Intel Xeon E3-1585L v5 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E3-1585L v5 and Intel Core i5-7600K occupy different corners of the Intel lineup, yet their benchmark scores place them in the same percentile bracket. The Xeon is a 45W Skylake-H part with 8 threads and ECC support, while the i5-7600K is a 91W Kaby Lake desktop chip with 4 threads and an unlocked multiplier. Despite the i5’s higher clocks and newer architecture, the Xeon wins every head-to-head Cinebench test, often by nearly 19%. This analysis walks through the data to explain how a low-power server chip outperforms a desktop gaming staple.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Xeon E3-1585L v5 has an average benchmark score of 1989, while the Core i5-7600K scores 1976. The difference is 13 points, or roughly 0.7%, placing both CPUs at the 44th percentile among all CPUs.

Q: How many threads does each processor support?

A: The Xeon E3-1585L v5 supports 8 threads via Hyper-Threading on its 4 cores. The Core i5-7600K has 4 cores and 4 threads, with no Hyper-Threading support.

Q: What is the largest benchmark margin between the two?

A: The largest margin is in Cinebench R15 multicore, where the Xeon scores 693 versus the i5’s 583, an 18.9% advantage. The single-core R15 test shows an 18.3% gap (97 vs 82).

Q: Does the i5-7600K have any benchmark wins?

A: No. In the six head-to-head Cinebench tests, the Xeon wins all six. The i5 has no wins in the provided data.

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: Only the Xeon E3-1585L v5 supports ECC memory. The Core i5-7600K does not list ECC in its memory support.

Q: Are both CPUs on the same process node?

A: Yes, both are built on Intel's 14 nm process. The Xeon uses the Skylake-H architecture, while the i5 uses Kaby Lake.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share a 14 nm process node but diverge in architecture and packaging. The Xeon E3-1585L v5 is based on Skylake-H, a mobile/embedded variant designed for low power, while the Core i5-7600K uses the newer Kaby Lake architecture for desktop. The Xeon comes in an Intel BGA 1440 socket (soldered), whereas the i5 uses the LGA-based Intel Socket 1151.

The Xeon's most defining feature is its 45W TDP, supported by a base clock of 3.00 GHz and boost clock of 3.70 GHz. The i5-7600K runs hotter at 91W TDP but clocks higher: 3.80 GHz base and 4.20 GHz boost. This clock advantage does not translate into benchmark wins, as the Xeon’s 8 threads and larger 8 MB L3 cache (versus the i5’s 6 MB) compensate for the lower frequencies.

Cache layout is similar per-core: both have 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core. The shared L3 differs: 8 MB on the Xeon, 6 MB on the i5. The Xeon also supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory, while the i5 is limited to DDR4. Both use dual-channel memory, but the i5 has a higher theoretical memory bandwidth at 38.4 GB/s versus 34.1 GB/s for the Xeon.

Integrated graphics differ significantly: the Xeon carries Iris Pro Graphics P580, a high-end iGPU with embedded DRAM (though not quantified here), while the i5 uses the basic HD 630. The Xeon targets server/workstation use with ECC support, while the i5 is a desktop part with an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. The i5’s multiplier is unlocked (true), whereas the Xeon’s is locked (false).

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon E3-1585L v5 outperforms the Core i5-7600K in every single benchmark recorded. The Xeon leads by 18.8% in Cinebench R23 multicore (6878 vs 5792) and by 18.8% in single-core R23 (971 vs 817). The smallest gap is 18.3% in R15 single-core, still a decisive margin.

The i5-7600K’s higher base and boost clocks (3.80/4.20 GHz) do not overcome the Xeon’s thread advantage (8 vs 4) and larger L3 cache (8 MB vs 6 MB). For workloads that scale with threads—rendering, compilation, multi-tasking—the Xeon is clearly the stronger chip. Even in single-core tests, the Xeon wins, which is surprising given the i5’s clock speed advantage.

However, the i5 has two structural advantages: it is an active product with a standard desktop socket (1151) and an unlocked multiplier, making it a candidate for overclocking systems. The Xeon is end-of-life, soldered to a BGA 1440 board, and locked. For a user building a new desktop, the i5 offers a path to higher clocks via manual tuning, but stock performance data favors the Xeon.

The verdict from the numbers: the Xeon E3-1585L v5 is the faster processor in all measured metrics. The i5-7600K is the more flexible platform for enthusiasts, but its benchmark scores trail by nearly a fifth across the board.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon E3-1585L v5 | Intel Core i5-7600K |

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

| Cores | 4 | 4 |

| Threads | 8 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 3.00 GHz | 3.80 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.70 GHz | 4.20 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 91 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1440 | Intel Socket 1151 |

| Architecture | Skylake-H | Kaby Lake |

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

| Memory Support | DDR3, DDR4 | DDR4 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 34.1 GB/s | 38.4 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| Integrated Graphics | Iris Pro Graphics P580 | HD 630 |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Desktop |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Launch MSRP | $445 | — |

The table highlights the core trade-off: the Xeon trades clock speed and memory bandwidth for threads, ECC, and a much lower TDP. The i5 counters with higher clocks, a desktop socket, and overclocking support. The i5 has no launch MSRP listed, while the Xeon carries a $445 launch price.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are remarkably consistent. Across six Cinebench tests, the Xeon’s margin over the i5 hovers between 18.3% and 18.9%. This uniformity suggests a fundamental architectural advantage rather than a workload-specific fluke.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Xeon scores 693 against the i5’s 583, an 18.9% lead. The single-core R15 test shows 97 vs 82, an 18.3% margin. Moving to R20, multicore sees 2888 vs 2432 (18.8% lead), and single-core sees 407 vs 343 (18.7% lead). The R23 results mirror this: multicore 6878 vs 5792 (18.8%) and single-core 971 vs 817 (18.8%).

The consistency of the delta—never straying far from 18.8%—indicates that the Xeon’s advantage is not dependent on thread scaling alone. Even in single-threaded tests, the Xeon wins, which is counterintuitive given the i5’s 4.20 GHz boost versus the Xeon’s 3.70 GHz. This suggests the Xeon’s Skylake-H architecture, possibly with the Iris Pro iGPU’s memory subsystem, delivers better instructions-per-clock in these specific workloads.

The i5’s only additional benchmark, Geekbench, shows a multicore score of 4239 and single-core of 1522. No Geekbench result exists for the Xeon, so no direct comparison is possible. The i5’s average benchmark score of 1976, however, is lower than the Xeon’s 1989, confirming the Cinebench trend.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon E3-1585L v5 wins every measured benchmark, so its use-case is straightforward: any workload that runs Cinebench-style rendering or compute benefits from its 8 threads and larger cache. The 45W TDP also makes it suitable for compact, low-power systems where heat and energy are constraints. Its ECC memory support and server/workstation segment further position it for reliability-focused tasks like data validation or long-running computations.

The i5-7600K has no benchmark wins in this dataset, but its strengths lie outside the measured metrics. Its unlocked multiplier is a clear advantage for overclocking, where users can push the 4.20 GHz boost clock higher still. The active production status and standard Socket 1151 mean it is a drop-in upgrade path for existing desktop motherboards. The HD 630 iGPU, while weaker than the Iris Pro, is sufficient for basic display output without a discrete GPU.

The Xeon’s BGA 1440 socket is a hard limitation—it cannot be installed in a standard desktop board. The i5’s 91W TDP is higher, but that power budget enables higher clocks for users who manually tune multipliers. For workloads that are latency-sensitive and single-threaded, the i5’s stock clocks are higher, yet the data shows the Xeon still wins those tests, so the i5’s advantage is theoretical rather than demonstrated.

In summary, the Xeon wins on raw performance and efficiency; the i5 wins on platform flexibility and overclocking headroom. The data does not support any performance win for the i5, but its ecosystem advantages may matter for specific builders.