Intel Core i5-8400H vs Intel Xeon E3-1260L v5 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep in the direct comparison between the Intel Xeon E3-1260L v5 and the Intel Core i5-8400H. Across six Cinebench tests, the Xeon E3-1260L v5 wins every single matchup, with the Core i5-8400H failing to claim a single victory.

The margins are remarkably consistent. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Xeon scores 707 against the i5's 644, a 9.8% advantage. The single-core test in R15 shows a 10% lead, with the Xeon at 99 points and the i5 at 90. Moving to Cinebench R20, the pattern holds: multicore shows 2946 versus 2684 (9.8% delta), and single-core shows 415 versus 378 (9.8% delta). The newest Cinebench R23 results continue the trend, with the Xeon posting 7015 versus 6392 in multicore (9.7% delta) and 990 versus 902 in single-core (9.8% delta).

What stands out here is the uniformity of the performance gap. Whether the workload is heavily threaded or purely single-threaded, the Xeon E3-1260L v5 maintains roughly a 10% edge across every generation of the Cinebench test suite. This consistency suggests the advantage is structural rather than workload-specific.

The average benchmark score reinforces this picture. The Xeon E3-1260L v5 averages 2029 across all recorded tests, while the Core i5-8400H averages 2003. That is a modest 1.3% difference in aggregate, yet the head-to-head Cinebench results show a much larger per-test gap. The discrepancy exists because the i5-8400H has additional Geekbench scores in its record (3656 multicore, 1281 single-core) that are not present in the Xeon's benchmark list, pulling its average upward relative to its Cinebench-only performance.

Both processors sit at the 45th percentile among all CPUs in the database, indicating they occupy the same general performance tier. The Xeon's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon E3-1280 v5 (identical 2029 average, 0% delta) and the Intel Core i7-5775R (2031 average, -0.1% delta). The i5-8400H's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 2800H (2002 average, 0.1% delta) and the Intel Core i5-8300H (2005 average, -0.1% delta). These neighbor comparisons show both chips are tightly clustered with their direct competitors, but the Xeon's internal head-to-head numbers tell a cleaner story of superiority.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon E3-1260L v5 wins every benchmark category recorded in the database. In Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, covering both multicore and single-core workloads, the Xeon leads by margins between 9.7% and 10%. This means for rendering tasks, 3D modeling, video encoding, or any application that scales with Cinebench-style CPU throughput, the Xeon E3-1260L v5 is the stronger choice.

The Intel Core i5-8400H does have two Geekbench scores in its records (3656 multicore, 1281 single-core), but no comparable Geekbench data exists for the Xeon E3-1260L v5 in the database. Without a direct head-to-head Geekbench comparison, those scores cannot be used to establish an advantage. In the recorded head-to-head tests that do exist, the i5-8400H has zero wins.

For single-threaded responsiveness, the Xeon's 10% lead in Cinebench R15 single-core (99 vs 90) and 9.8% lead in R20 and R23 single-core indicate better per-core performance despite the i5's higher boost clock of 4.10 GHz compared to the Xeon's 3.90 GHz. The Xeon's higher base clock of 2.90 GHz versus 2.50 GHz likely contributes to this result.

For multi-threaded throughput, the Xeon again leads by nearly identical margins, showing that the i5's larger 12 MB L3 cache does not translate into a performance advantage in these tests. The Xeon's 8 MB shared L3 cache proves sufficient for the recorded workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i5-8400H has a boost clock of 4.10 GHz, while the Intel Xeon E3-1260L v5 boosts to 3.90 GHz.

Q: How much faster is the Xeon E3-1260L v5 in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The Xeon scores 7015 compared to the i5-8400H's 6392, a 9.7% advantage.

Q: Do both processors have the same number of cores and threads?

A: Yes, both have 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1260L v5 supports ECC memory; the Intel Core i5-8400H does not.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two?

A: The Xeon E3-1260L v5 averages 2029, while the i5-8400H averages 2003, a difference of 26 points or about 1.3%.

Q: Does the i5-8400H have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the i5-8400H includes UHD 630 integrated graphics. The Xeon E3-1260L v5 has no integrated graphics listed.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several fundamental specifications. The Xeon E3-1260L v5 uses the Intel Socket 1151, while the i5-8400H uses the Intel BGA 1440 socket, making them physically incompatible. The Xeon has a base clock of 2.90 GHz and boost clock of 3.90 GHz; the i5 has a lower base clock of 2.50 GHz but a higher boost clock of 4.10 GHz.

Memory support differs significantly. The Xeon supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory in dual-channel configuration with a memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. The i5-8400H supports only DDR4 memory, with no memory bus or bandwidth figures recorded. ECC memory is supported on the Xeon but not on the i5.

The Xeon has PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while no PCIe information is recorded for the i5. The i5 includes UHD 630 integrated graphics; the Xeon has none listed. The Xeon has a launch MSRP of $294; no launch MSRP is recorded for the i5.

The Xeon's part number is SR2LH, and the i5's is SR3Z1. The Xeon was released on 2015-10-18, while the i5 was released on 2018-04-01. Both are end-of-life products.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on Intel's 14 nm process node at Intel's foundry, but they belong to different architectures. The Xeon E3-1260L v5 uses the Skylake architecture with the Skylake-DT codename, from the Xeon E3 (Skylake-DT) generation. The i5-8400H uses the Coffee Lake architecture with the Coffee Lake-H codename, from the Core i5 (Coffee Lake-H) generation.

The Xeon has a die size of 122 mm² and contains 1,750 million transistors. The i5 has a slightly larger die size of 126 mm², but its transistor count is not recorded. Both have 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core. The L3 cache differs: the Xeon has 8 MB shared, while the i5 has 12 MB shared.

The market segments differ as well. The Xeon E3-1260L v5 is classified as a Server/Workstation processor, while the i5-8400H is classified as Mobile. This explains the socket difference and the Xeon's ECC support, which is typical for server-class parts. Both processors have locked multipliers, so neither supports overclocking.

Neither processor has 3D V-Cache listed. The Xeon's memory bus is explicitly dual-channel, while the i5's memory bus information is absent from the records.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for raw CPU performance: the Intel Xeon E3-1260L v5. In every head-to-head benchmark recorded, it beats the Intel Core i5-8400H by roughly 10%. This holds across both single-core and multicore workloads in three different versions of Cinebench. For users prioritizing compute throughput, rendering performance, or single-threaded speed, the Xeon E3-1260L v5 is the superior processor based on the recorded measurements.

The Xeon also offers features the i5 lacks, including ECC memory support and dual-channel DDR3/DDR4 compatibility. Its server/workstation classification comes with a launch MSRP of $294. The i5-8400H, by contrast, has no recorded launch price and lacks ECC support.

However, the i5-8400H is not without its own merits. It has a higher boost clock (4.10 GHz vs 3.90 GHz), a larger L3 cache (12 MB vs 8 MB), and includes UHD 630 integrated graphics, which the Xeon does not have. For a mobile platform, the integrated GPU could be essential, as the BGA 1440 socket is designed for soldered laptop installations. The i5's smaller average benchmark deficit (1.3%) compared to the per-test Cinebench gap (around 10%) also suggests it performs relatively better in non-Cinebench workloads, though direct comparison data is limited.

Who should pick which? Users building a server or workstation on Socket 1151, requiring ECC memory, or needing the highest possible Cinebench scores should choose the Xeon E3-1260L v5. Users needing a mobile processor with integrated graphics, a higher boost clock, and a larger cache should choose the i5-8400H. The i5 also benefits from a later release date (2018 vs 2015), though both are now end-of-life products. For pure benchmark performance, the data unambiguously favors the Xeon E3-1260L v5.