Intel Core i5-8300H vs Intel Xeon E3-1285L v4 Comparison

The Intel Core i5-8300H and Intel Xeon E3-1285L v4 are both four-core, eight-thread Intel processors, but they target entirely different worlds: one is a mobile chip for laptops, the other a server/workstation part for socketed motherboards. The benchmark data shows a clear, consistent performance hierarchy, with the older Xeon winning every single head-to-head test despite its age.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Xeon E3-1285L v4 dominates the i5-8300H across the entire Cinebench suite. In the multi-core tests, the Xeon scores 693 in Cinebench R15 versus 629 for the i5, a 9.2% advantage. The gap widens slightly in R20, where the Xeon posts 2891 against the i5's 2622, a 9.3% lead. The margin holds steady in R23 multi-core: 6884 for the Xeon against 6245 for the i5, again 9.3% ahead.

Single-core results tell the same story. The Xeon wins Cinebench R15 single-core with 97 points versus 88, a 9.3% edge. In R20 single-core, the Xeon's 407 trumps the i5's 370 by 9.1%. The R23 single-core test shows the Xeon at 971 and the i5 at 881, a 9.3% gap. In every one of the six head-to-head benchmarks, the Xeon E3-1285L v4 comes out on top, with no wins for the i5-8300H.

The i5-8300H does have one advantage in the broader benchmark pool: Geekbench scores are only listed for the i5, showing 3920 multi-core and 1286 single-core. The Xeon has no Geekbench entries in this data, so a direct comparison in that test is impossible. However, the average benchmark score across all available tests favors the i5 slightly: 2005 for the i5 versus 1991 for the Xeon. This is due to the i5's Geekbench results pulling its average up, while the Xeon's average is based solely on the Cinebench tests.

Looking at percentile rankings, the i5-8300H sits at the 45th percentile among all CPUs, while the Xeon E3-1285L v4 is just below at the 44th percentile. The i5's nearest rival is the Intel Xeon D-1712TR with an average score of 2004, just one point behind. The Xeon's closest competitor is the AMD Ryzen 5 1500X at 1992, essentially tied with the Xeon's 1991.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and are built for different physical environments. The i5-8300H uses the Coffee Lake architecture, specifically the Coffee Lake-H codename, and is manufactured on a 14 nm process with a die size of 126 mm². It fits into the Intel BGA 1440 socket, which is soldered directly to a laptop motherboard. The Xeon E3-1285L v4 uses the older Broadwell architecture with the Broadwell-DT codename, also on a 14 nm process, but with a larger die size of 160 mm² and a transistor count of 1,400 million. It uses the Intel Socket 1150 for desktop/workstation boards.

Cache configurations differ significantly. Both have 64 KB of L1 cache and 256 KB of L2 cache per core, but the L3 cache is a major differentiator: the i5-8300H has 12 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Xeon E3-1285L v4 has only 6 MB. Despite having half the cache, the Xeon still outperforms the i5 across the board, suggesting its higher clock speeds compensate for the cache deficit.

Clock speeds favor the Xeon on base frequency but the i5 on boost. The Xeon runs at a 3.40 GHz base clock and boosts to 3.80 GHz. The i5-8300H has a lower 2.30 GHz base clock but a higher 3.90 GHz boost clock. The Xeon's much higher base clock is likely a key reason it wins every benchmark, as sustained workloads benefit from higher baseline frequency.

Memory support is another clear split. The i5-8300H supports DDR4 memory and does not support ECC. The Xeon E3-1285L v4 supports DDR3 memory with a dual-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s, and it does support ECC memory. The integrated graphics also differ: the i5 packs a UHD 630, while the Xeon has the more capable Intel Iris Pro P6300. The Xeon also lists PCIe Gen 3 support, while the i5's PCIe information is not provided.

Power and thermal envelopes diverge substantially. The i5-8300H has a TDP of 45 watts, appropriate for a mobile part. The Xeon E3-1285L v4 has a TDP of 65 watts, reflecting its workstation heritage and higher base clock. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, and both are end-of-life products. The i5-8300H was released in April 2018, while the Xeon E3-1285L v4 came earlier, in June 2015.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1285L v4 wins every multi-core Cinebench test. It scores 693 in R15, 2891 in R20, and 6884 in R23, compared to the i5-8300H's 629, 2622, and 6245 respectively. The Xeon's lead is consistently around 9.2% to 9.3%.

Q: Does the i5-8300H have any benchmark advantage?

A: The i5-8300H has a higher average benchmark score of 2005 versus 1991 for the Xeon, but this is because the i5 has Geekbench scores (3920 multi-core, 1286 single-core) that are included in its average, while the Xeon has no Geekbench results listed. In direct head-to-head Cinebench comparisons, the Xeon wins all six tests.

Q: How do their cache sizes compare?

A: The i5-8300H has 12 MB of shared L3 cache, which is double the Xeon E3-1285L v4's 6 MB. Both have 64 KB of L1 cache and 256 KB of L2 cache per core.

Q: What are the key clock speed differences?

A: The Xeon E3-1285L v4 has a higher base clock of 3.40 GHz versus 2.30 GHz for the i5-8300H. However, the i5 has a higher boost clock of 3.90 GHz versus 3.80 GHz for the Xeon.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1285L v4 supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core i5-8300H does not. The Xeon also supports DDR3 memory with a dual-channel bus and 29.9 GB/s bandwidth, while the i5 supports DDR4.

Q: What are the power consumption differences?

A: The i5-8300H has a TDP of 45 watts, while the Xeon E3-1285L v4 has a higher TDP of 65 watts. This reflects the i5's mobile design versus the Xeon's server/workstation orientation.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon E3-1285L v4 is the faster processor in every benchmark where both are measured. It wins all six Cinebench tests with margins between 9.1% and 9.3%. This is despite the i5-8300H having twice the L3 cache (12 MB vs 6 MB) and a higher boost clock (3.90 GHz vs 3.80 GHz). The Xeon's much higher base clock (3.40 GHz vs 2.30 GHz) appears to be the deciding factor in sustained workloads.

For buyers choosing between these two, the decision hinges on platform and workload. The i5-8300H is a mobile part for laptops with a 45-watt TDP, DDR4 support, and a BGA 1440 socket. The Xeon E3-1285L v4 is a server/workstation part with a 65-watt TDP, DDR3 support, ECC memory capability, and a Socket 1150. The Xeon also carries a launch MSRP of $445.

The i5-8300H makes sense for a laptop build where its lower TDP and integrated UHD 630 graphics fit a mobile chassis, and its higher boost clock may give it an edge in short burst workloads. The Xeon E3-1285L v4 is the clear choice for raw performance in a desktop or workstation environment, especially where ECC memory reliability is needed. Its Iris Pro P6300 integrated graphics are also a step up from the UHD 630.

The percentile rankings are close, with the i5 at 45th and the Xeon at 44th, and their average benchmark scores differ by only 14 points (2005 vs 1991). But in direct competition, the Xeon E3-1285L v4 is simply the faster chip, and the data shows it wins every single test.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i5-8300H | Intel Xeon E3-1285L v4 |

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

| Base Clock | 2.30 GHz | 3.40 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.90 GHz | 3.80 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 65 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1440 | Intel Socket 1150 |

| Architecture | Coffee Lake | Broadwell |

| Codename | Coffee Lake-H | Broadwell-DT |

| Die Size | 126 mm² | 160 mm² |

| Transistors | Not provided | 1,400 million |

| L3 Cache | 12 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus | Not provided | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not provided | 29.9 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Not provided | Gen 3 |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD 630 | Intel Iris Pro P6300 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Server/Workstation |

| Release Date | April 2018 | June 2015 |

| Launch MSRP | Not provided | $445 |

| Part Number | SR3Z0 | SR2B1 |