Intel Core i5-8305G vs Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 Comparison

The Intel Core i5-8305G and the Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 are both 14 nm mobile processors with four cores and eight threads, but they target different segments: the former is a Kaby Lake-G part with integrated Radeon graphics, while the latter is a Skylake-H Xeon designed for workstations. Benchmark data shows the Xeon leading in every head-to-head test, yet both chips occupy the same 42nd percentile of all CPUs, making their overall performance nearly identical. The following analysis breaks down the architectural differences, benchmark results, and use-case implications based strictly on the provided specifications.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i5-8305G boosts to 3.80 GHz, while the Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 reaches 3.70 GHz. Despite the i5’s higher peak frequency, the Xeon wins every single-core benchmark in the head-to-head data.

Q: How do their Cinebench R23 multi-core scores compare?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 scores 6284, which is 8.7% higher than the Core i5-8305G’s 5739. This is the largest absolute margin in the multi-core tests, though the percentage gap is consistent across all Cinebench versions.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 has ECC memory support enabled, while the Intel Core i5-8305G does not. This is a key differentiator for workstation reliability use cases.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each chip?

A: The Intel Core i5-8305G has an average benchmark score of 1831, and the Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 scores 1817. The Xeon’s nearest rival is the Intel Core i5-6600K with a delta of 0.1%, while the i5-8305G’s closest competitor is the AMD Ryzen 5 4600U with a delta of 0%.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, whereas the Intel Core i5-8305G has 6 MB. Both have 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core.

Q: What is the production status of each chip?

A: The Intel Core i5-8305G is listed as "Active," while the Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 is "End-of-life." The Xeon was released in October 2015, and the i5-8305G came later in January 2018.

Architecture Differences

The two processors stem from different Intel architectures. The Core i5-8305G is based on Kaby Lake, specifically the Kaby Lake G codename, while the Xeon E3-1505M v5 uses Skylake, with the codename Skylake-H. Both are built on Intel’s 14 nm process node, but the Xeon’s die is 122 mm² with 2,300 million transistors, whereas the i5-8305G has no listed die size or transistor count in the data.

Cache hierarchies differ in total L3 capacity. The i5-8305G offers 6 MB of shared L3, while the Xeon provides 8 MB. Per-core L1 and L2 caches are identical at 64 KB and 256 KB, respectively. The Xeon also lists a dual-channel memory bus with 34.1 GB/s bandwidth and supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory; the i5-8305G only lists DDR4 support without a memory bus or bandwidth figure.

Integrated graphics is a major distinction. The Core i5-8305G pairs with a Radeon RX Vega M GL GPU, while the Xeon E3-1505M v5 integrates Intel HD Graphics P530. The Xeon adds ECC memory support and a PCIe Gen 3, 16-lane (CPU only) interface, which the i5-8305G does not specify. The Xeon’s socket is Intel BGA 1440, and the i5-8305G uses Intel BGA 2270.

Power and thermal envelopes also differ. The Xeon has a 45 W TDP, while the i5-8305G is rated at 65 W. Base clocks are identical at 2.80 GHz, but the i5-8305G boosts 100 MHz higher to 3.80 GHz versus the Xeon’s 3.70 GHz. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a clean sweep: the Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 wins all six benchmark comparisons. The margins are consistent, hovering around 8.6% to 9% across the board. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 633 against the i5-8305G’s 578, a delta of -8.7% for the i5. Single-core R15 shows 89 versus 81, a -9% gap, which is the largest margin in the dataset.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the Xeon’s multi-core score is 2639 versus 2410, again -8.7%. Single-core R20 is 372 versus 340, a -8.6% difference. The Cinebench R23 results mirror the pattern: multi-core 6284 versus 5739 (-8.7%) and single-core 887 versus 810 (-8.7%). The i5-8305G does not have any wins in the head-to-head table; all six victories belong to the Xeon.

The overall percentile ranking is identical for both chips at 42, despite the Xeon’s consistent benchmark lead. The i5-8305G’s average benchmark score of 1831 is slightly higher than the Xeon’s 1817, which suggests the i5 may perform better in other unlisted tests. However, in the six benchmarks explicitly compared, the Xeon is uniformly faster, with single-core margins slightly larger than multi-core ones in R15 and R20.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 is the superior performer in every measured head-to-head test. It leads by roughly 8.7% in multi-core workloads and by up to 9% in single-core R15. The Xeon also offers ECC memory support, a larger 8 MB L3 cache, and a lower 45 W TDP, making it more power-efficient per unit of performance. The i5-8305G counters with a higher boost clock (3.80 GHz versus 3.70 GHz), a newer Kaby Lake architecture, and an Active production status, but these do not translate into any benchmark wins.

The Xeon’s end-of-life status and 2015 release date are caveats, but the data does not show the i5-8305G overcoming the performance gap. For users who prioritize raw compute in the tested Cinebench and Geekbench workloads, the Xeon is the clear choice. The i5-8305G’s only advantages are its integrated Radeon RX Vega M GL GPU and its newer release date, which do not appear in the benchmark scores.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the Intel Core i5-8305G and the Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5:

• Boost Clock: 3.80 GHz (i5) vs 3.70 GHz (Xeon)
• TDP: 65 W (i5) vs 45 W (Xeon)
• Socket: Intel BGA 2270 (i5) vs Intel BGA 1440 (Xeon)
• Architecture / Codename: Kaby Lake / Kaby Lake G (i5) vs Skylake / Skylake-H (Xeon)
• Generation: Core i5 (Kaby Lake-G) vs Xeon E3 (Skylake-H)
• Transistors: Not listed (i5) vs 2,300 million (Xeon)
• Die Size: Not listed (i5) vs 122 mm² (Xeon)
• L3 Cache: 6 MB shared (i5) vs 8 MB shared (Xeon)
• Memory Support: DDR4 only (i5) vs DDR3, DDR4 (Xeon)
• Memory Bus: Not listed (i5) vs Dual-channel (Xeon)
• Memory Bandwidth: Not listed (i5) vs 34.1 GB/s (Xeon)
• ECC Memory: False (i5) vs True (Xeon)
• PCIe: Not listed (i5) vs Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) (Xeon)
• Integrated Graphics: Radeon RX Vega M GL (i5) vs HD Graphics P530 (Xeon)
• Market Segment: Mobile (i5) vs Server/Workstation (Xeon)
• Production Status: Active (i5) vs End-of-life (Xeon)
• Release Date: 2018-01-31 (i5) vs 2015-10-26 (Xeon)
• Launch MSRP: Not listed (i5) vs $434 (Xeon)
• Part Number: Not listed (i5) vs SR2FM (Xeon)

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 wins in all six head-to-head benchmarks, covering both Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in single- and multi-core tests. Its margins range from 8.6% to 9%, with the largest advantage in Cinebench R15 single-core (89 versus 81). The Xeon is also the only one of the two with ECC memory support, dual-channel memory, and a listed memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s, making it the choice for workstation reliability and memory-intensive workloads. Its larger 8 MB L3 cache and lower 45 W TDP further favor sustained multi-threaded tasks where power efficiency matters.

The Intel Core i5-8305G has zero benchmark wins in the provided data, but it does have qualitative advantages. Its integrated Radeon RX Vega M GL graphics is a distinct feature that the Xeon’s HD Graphics P530 cannot match, which could be decisive in GPU-accelerated tasks that do not rely on the CPU’s compute scores. The i5-8305G also has a higher boost clock (3.80 GHz versus 3.70 GHz), a newer release date, and an Active production status, indicating better current availability. Its average benchmark score of 1831 is slightly higher than the Xeon’s 1817, suggesting that in benchmarks outside the six compared—such as Geekbench, where the i5 scores 3536 multi-core and 1150 single-core—the i5 may close the gap or even pull ahead.