CPU Comparison

The Intel Core i5-8400H and Intel Xeon E-2276M present a compelling contrast within the same Coffee Lake-H generation. Both are 45 W mobile parts on the Intel BGA 1440 socket, yet benchmark results show they are tuned for entirely different priorities. The data reveals a split decision: the i5-8400H dominates in Cinebench workloads, while the Xeon E-2276M takes a decisive lead in Geekbench. The following analysis breaks down these results, the architectural differences behind them, and what each processor is best suited for.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking pattern in the head-to-head data is the complete reversal of fortunes between the two benchmark suites. Across all three versions of Cinebench (R15, R20, and R23), the Intel Core i5-8400H is the clear winner, posting remarkably consistent margins. In Cinebench R15, the i5-8400H scores 644 multi-core versus the Xeon’s 544, a delta of 18.4%. The single-core R15 test shows the same 18.4% advantage, with scores of 90 and 76. This consistency is not an anomaly; Cinebench R20 multi-core shows the i5-8400H at 2684 against 2268 for the Xeon (18.3% delta), and R23 multi-core shows 6392 versus 5400 (18.4% delta). The single-core results in R20 and R23 mirror this exactly, with deltas of 18.1% and 18.4% respectively. The i5-8400H wins six of the eight head-to-head benchmarks, and its Cinebench victories are not marginal, they are uniform 18% sweeps.

However, the Geekbench results tell a completely different story. Here, the Intel Xeon E-2276M turns the tables decisively. In Geekbench multi-core, the Xeon scores 5159 against the i5-8400H’s 3656, a massive 29.1% advantage for the Xeon. The single-core Geekbench test also favors the Xeon, with a score of 1440 versus 1281, representing an 11% lead. This is a stark divergence from the Cinebench results. It indicates that the two processors have fundamentally different performance characteristics that are being measured differently by each suite. The i5-8400H’s consistent 18% lead in Cinebench is offset by a 29% deficit in Geekbench multi-core, making the overall performance picture highly workload-dependent.

Looking at the broader context, the i5-8400H has an average benchmark score of 2003 across all its tests, placing it in the 45th percentile of all CPUs. The Xeon E-2276M has a slightly lower average score of 1996, placing it in the 44th percentile. The nearest rivals for the i5-8400H include the AMD Ryzen 7 2800H (avg score 2002, delta 0.1%) and the Intel Core i5-8400T (avg score 2001, delta 0.1%), showing it sits in a very tight performance cluster. The Xeon E-2276M’s nearest rivals are the Intel Core i7-7920HQ (avg score 1992, delta 0.2%) and the AMD Ryzen 5 1500X (avg score 1992, delta 0.2%). This data suggests that while the two processors are close in aggregate, their individual benchmark profiles are wildly different.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data points to a clear use-case split. The Intel Core i5-8400H is the winner in rendering and compute-intensive tasks that rely on Cinebench’s workload. Its consistent 18% advantage in all Cinebench tests, both single and multi-core, suggests a significant edge in tasks that utilize the CPU’s core architecture in a specific way, likely related to 3D rendering and simulation. For any workload that mirrors Cinebench’s rendering engine, the i5-8400H is the superior choice.

The Intel Xeon E-2276M, on the other hand, is the winner in Geekbench, which often reflects more general-purpose and productivity tasks. Its 29.1% lead in Geekbench multi-core is substantial, indicating a major advantage in parallel workloads that are scheduled differently than Cinebench. This could include tasks like code compilation, data analysis, or running multiple virtual machines. The 11% lead in single-core Geekbench also suggests the Xeon has a higher peak throughput in certain integer and floating-point operations.

The production status and market segment reinforce this split. The i5-8400H is a mobile part from the Core i5 series, launched in April 2018, and is now end-of-life. The Xeon E-2276M, from the Xeon E-2200 series, targets the Server/Workstation segment. It was launched later, in May 2019, and is also end-of-life. This positioning is critical: the Xeon is built for workstation duties where multi-threaded throughput in non-rendering applications is paramount, while the i5-8400H appears optimized for other types of multi-core workloads.

Architecture Differences

Despite being on the same 14 nm process node and sharing the Coffee Lake architecture and Coffee Lake-H codename, the two chips have distinct physical implementations. The most obvious difference is core count: the i5-8400H has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Xeon E-2276M has 6 cores and 12 threads. This 50% increase in core count for the Xeon is the primary reason for its Geekbench multi-core dominance, even though it does not translate to a Cinebench win.

The die size differs as well, with the i5-8400H measuring 126 mm² and the Xeon E-2276M measuring 154 mm². This larger die is necessary to accommodate the two additional cores. The L1 and L2 cache sizes are identical on a per-core basis (64 KB and 256 KB per core), but the total L3 cache is the same at 12 MB shared between both processors. This means the i5-8400H has a larger L3 cache per core (3 MB per core) compared to the Xeon’s 2 MB per core.

Clock speeds also differ significantly. The i5-8400H has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. The Xeon E-2276M has a higher base clock of 2.80 GHz and a much higher boost clock of 4.70 GHz. These higher clock speeds on the Xeon explain its single-core Geekbench lead, yet they are insufficient to overcome the i5-8400H’s advantage in Cinebench single-core tests, which is curious. The integrated graphics differ too: the i5-8400H has the UHD 630, while the Xeon E-2276M has the UHD Graphics P630. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the i5-8400H, and its memory bus is specified as dual-channel with a bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s, a detail not provided for the i5-8400H.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher core count?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2276M has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core i5-8400H has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Why does the Xeon E-2276M win in Geekbench multi-core despite losing in Cinebench?

A: The Xeon’s 29.1% lead in Geekbench multi-core (5159 vs 3656) is likely due to its higher core count and boost clock of 4.70 GHz, which are more effectively utilized by the Geekbench workload than by Cinebench.

Q: What is the difference in boost clock speeds?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2276M has a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, which is higher than the Intel Core i5-8400H’s boost clock of 4.10 GHz.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Intel Xeon E-2276M supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core i5-8400H does not.

Q: What is the market segment for each processor?

A: The Intel Core i5-8400H is targeted at the Mobile segment, while the Intel Xeon E-2276M is positioned for the Server/Workstation segment.

Q: Are these processors from the same architecture?

A: Yes, both the Intel Core i5-8400H and the Intel Xeon E-2276M are based on the Coffee Lake architecture and manufactured on Intel’s 14 nm process node.

Specification Differences

The following table outlines the key specifications where the two processors differ, based on the available data.

| Specification | Intel Core i5-8400H | Intel Xeon E-2276M |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Cores | 4 | 6 |

| Threads | 8 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 2.50 GHz | 2.80 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.10 GHz | 4.70 GHz |

| Die Size | 126 mm² | 154 mm² |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD 630 | UHD Graphics P630 |

| ECC Memory Support | false | true |

| Memory Bus | Not specified | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not specified | 42.7 GB/s |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Server/Workstation |

| Release Date | 2018-04-01 | 2019-05-28 |

| Part Number | SR3Z1 | SRFCK |

| Launch MSRP | Not specified | $450 |

| Geekbench Multicore Score | 3656 | 5159 |

| Cinebench R23 Multicore Score | 6392 | 5400 |