Intel Core i5-8259U vs Intel Xeon E5-2628 v3 Comparison

The Intel Core i5-8259U and Intel Xeon E5-2628 v3 occupy opposite ends of Intel's product stack: one is a mobile processor with integrated graphics, the other a server/workstation chip with a high core count. The recorded head-to-head data shows a clear winner in Cinebench tests, but the i5 counters with a higher average benchmark score and a much lower power envelope. This analysis examines the architecture, benchmark results, and specification differences to determine which processor fits which use case.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the head-to-head benchmark data, the Intel Xeon E5-2628 v3 is the faster processor in every recorded Cinebench test. It wins all six comparisons, with deltas ranging from -7.7% to -7.8% relative to the i5-8259U. That means the Xeon is consistently about 7.8% ahead in both single-core and multi-core Cinebench workloads. For anyone whose primary workload is Cinebench rendering, the Xeon is the clear choice.

However, the i5-8259U has its own advantages. It carries a launch MSRP of $320, though that figure is not directly comparable because the Xeon has no recorded launch price. The i5 also has a higher average benchmark score (2108 vs 2076) when all recorded tests are considered, including Geekbench results that the Xeon does not have. The i5's integrated graphics, lower TDP (28 W vs 85 W), and smaller process node (14 nm vs 22 nm) make it more suitable for mobile or power-constrained environments. The verdict depends on whether raw Cinebench performance or portability and integrated features matter more.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures. The i5-8259U uses Coffee Lake, specifically the Coffee Lake-U variant, while the Xeon E5-2628 v3 is based on Haswell, specifically Haswell-EP. The process nodes differ: the i5 uses a 14 nm process, the Xeon a 22 nm process. The Xeon has a much larger die size at 356 mm² compared to the i5's 126 mm², and it contains 2,600 million transistors, a figure not recorded for the i5.

Core and thread counts are a major differentiator. The i5 has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Xeon has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Xeon also has a larger L3 cache: 20 MB shared versus 6 MB shared on the i5. Both have the same L1 and L2 cache per core (64 KB and 256 KB respectively). The Xeon's memory subsystem is more robust: it supports quad-channel DDR4 with a bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s, while the i5 uses dual-channel DDR4 with 38.4 GB/s. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, which the i5 does not.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The i5 provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Xeon provides Gen 3 with 40 lanes. The Xeon has no integrated graphics, whereas the i5 includes Iris Pro Plus 655. The sockets are incompatible: the i5 uses Intel BGA 1526, the Xeon uses Intel Socket 2011-3. The market segments are also distinct: the i5 is classified as Mobile, the Xeon as Server/Workstation. Both are end-of-life, but the i5 was released in 2018, the Xeon in 2014.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data consists of six Cinebench tests, and the Xeon wins all of them. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 723 against the i5's 667, a delta of -7.7%. In single-core, the Xeon scores 102 versus 94, a delta of -7.8%. The pattern continues in Cinebench R20: multi-core 3015 vs 2781 (-7.8%), single-core 425 vs 392 (-7.8%). In Cinebench R23, the Xeon scores 7179 vs 6622 in multi-core (-7.8%) and 1013 vs 934 in single-core (-7.8%).

The consistency of the delta is striking. Every test except the first shows exactly -7.8%, and the first is -7.7%. This suggests a uniform performance advantage for the Xeon across different Cinebench versions and workload types. The Xeon's higher core count and larger cache likely contribute to this lead, though the i5's higher boost clock (3.80 GHz vs 3.00 GHz) does not close the gap in these tests.

It is worth remembering the i5 has additional Geekbench scores (multi-core 4168, single-core 1207) that are not part of the head-to-head set because the Xeon lacks Geekbench results. The i5's average benchmark score of 2108 is higher than the Xeon's 2076, but that average includes the Geekbench numbers. In the recorded head-to-head, the Xeon is unequivocally faster.

Specification Differences

The following table lists the fields where the two processors differ, based on the recorded data.

| Specification | Intel Core i5-8259U | Intel Xeon E5-2628 v3 |

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

| Cores | 4 | 8 |

| Threads | 8 | 16 |

| Base clock | 2.30 GHz | 2.50 GHz |

| Boost clock | 3.80 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 85 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1526 | Intel Socket 2011-3 |

| Architecture | Coffee Lake | Haswell |

| Codename | Coffee Lake-U | Haswell-EP |

| Generation | Core i5 (Coffee Lake-U) | Xeon E5 (Haswell-EP) |

| Process node | 14 nm | 22 nm |

| Die size | 126 mm² | 356 mm² |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 2,600 million |

| L3 cache | 6 MB (shared) | 20 MB (shared) |

| Memory bus | Dual-channel | Quad-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 38.4 GB/s | 68.3 GB/s |

| ECC memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 16 lanes | Gen 3, 40 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | Iris Pro Plus 655 | None |

| Market segment | Mobile | Server/Workstation |

| Release date | 2018-04-04 | 2014-09-07 |

| Launch MSRP | $320 | Not recorded |

Both processors have the same L1 and L2 cache per core, both support DDR4 memory, both are manufactured by Intel, and both are end-of-life with locked multipliers. The i5 has a part number of SRCKBSRCUU, while the Xeon is SR201.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2628 v3 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core i5-8259U has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The i5-8259U has a boost clock of 3.80 GHz, which is higher than the Xeon's 3.00 GHz.

Q: Does the Xeon support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Xeon E5-2628 v3 supports ECC memory, while the i5-8259U does not.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The i5-8259U includes Iris Pro Plus 655 integrated graphics. The Xeon E5-2628 v3 has no integrated graphics.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The i5-8259U has an average benchmark score of 2108, compared to the Xeon's 2076. However, the Xeon wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Xeon E5-2628 v3 has 20 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i5-8259U has 6 MB.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon E5-2628 v3 wins every recorded Cinebench test, making it the superior choice for workloads that rely on Cinebench performance, such as 3D rendering or CPU-based ray tracing. Its higher core count, larger L3 cache, and quad-channel memory bandwidth give it a consistent edge in both single-core and multi-core Cinebench scenarios. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, which is critical for server and workstation environments where data integrity is paramount. Its 40 PCIe lanes provide more expansion headroom for multiple GPUs or high-speed storage.

The i5-8259U, on the other hand, wins in scenarios where portability and power efficiency are priorities. Its TDP of 28 W is less than a third of the Xeon's 85 W, making it suitable for laptops and compact devices. The integrated Iris Pro Plus 655 graphics eliminate the need for a discrete GPU in basic display tasks. The i5 also has a higher boost clock (3.80 GHz vs 3.00 GHz), which can benefit lightly threaded applications that are not Cinebench-based, though the head-to-head data does not cover such workloads. Its smaller process node (14 nm vs 22 nm) and newer release date (2018 vs 2014) suggest a more modern design, though the recorded data does not include efficiency metrics.

In terms of average benchmark score, the i5 leads with 2108 versus 2076, but that lead is driven by Geekbench results that the Xeon does not have. The head-to-head Cinebench data is the only direct comparison available, and it favors the Xeon across the board. For users who need maximum Cinebench throughput, the Xeon is the clear winner. For users who need a low-power processor with integrated graphics and a higher boost clock, the i5 is the better fit. The choice ultimately depends on whether raw compute performance or mobility and integrated features are more important.