Intel Core i7-11375H vs Intel Xeon E-2414 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark split in this comparison is unusually one-sided. The Intel Xeon E-2414 wins all six head-to-head tests recorded in the database, covering both Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in their multicore and singlecore variants. The Core i7-11375H does not secure a single win in any shared benchmark. However, the Core i7 does hold an edge in the broader performance picture: its average benchmark score sits at 3018, which is 3.9% higher than the Xeon's 2905 average, and it places in the 52nd percentile of all CPUs versus the Xeon's 51st.

The Xeon E-2414 is the stronger choice for sustained multi-threaded workstation workloads. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 10046 is 2.8% ahead of the Core i7's 9775, and the pattern repeats across every generation of the Cinebench suite. The margin is consistent, hovering around 2.7% to 2.9% in all six tests. This suggests a small but reliable performance advantage in threaded rendering tasks, which aligns with its server and workstation market positioning.

The Core i7-11375H, despite losing every direct head-to-head test, shows a higher average score because the database includes Geekbench results for this chip, tests that are not recorded for the Xeon. Its Geekbench singlecore score of 1800 and multicore score of 5383 are solid numbers for a mobile processor. The Core i7 also carries integrated Iris XE 96EU graphics, making it the only one of the two with a built-in GPU, which matters for systems that cannot accommodate a discrete graphics card.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and target different market segments. The Xeon E-2414 belongs to the Xeon E-2400 series, uses Raptor Lake-S architecture, and is built for servers and workstations. It fits into Intel Socket 1700 and is an active production part released in December 2023. The Core i7-11375H is a Tiger Lake-H mobile chip from the Core 11th Gen family, using Intel BGA 1449, released in January 2021, and is also still active in production.

Both chips use Intel's 10 nm process node. The Xeon has a die size of 163 mm², while the Core i7 is smaller at 146.1 mm². Cache layouts are identical in structure: 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The core counts also match at four physical cores, but the threading differs. The Xeon runs 4 threads total, meaning no hyper-threading, while the Core i7 runs 8 threads, giving it simultaneous multithreading on all four cores.

Clock speeds favor the Core i7. Its base clock is 3.00 GHz and boost clock reaches 5.00 GHz, compared to the Xeon's 2.60 GHz base and 4.50 GHz boost. The Xeon counters with a higher TDP of 55 watts versus the Core i7's 28 watts, reflecting its workstation-oriented power envelope. Memory support diverges as well: the Xeon uses DDR5 with dual-channel configuration and 76.8 GB/s bandwidth, while the Core i7 uses DDR4 with dual-channel and 51.2 GB/s. ECC memory is supported on the Xeon but not on the Core i7.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Xeon offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Core i7 offers Gen 4 with 20 lanes. The Xeon has no integrated graphics, while the Core i7 includes Iris XE 96EU. The Core i7's launch MSRP is $482, and the Xeon's is $225.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head results show a consistent, narrow lead for the Xeon E-2414. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Xeon scores 1012 against the Core i7's 985, a 2.7% advantage. The R15 singlecore test shows the Xeon at 142 versus 138, a 2.9% lead, the largest margin in the entire comparison.

Cinebench R20 continues the trend. The Xeon posts 4219 in multicore against 4105, a 2.8% edge. In singlecore, the Xeon scores 595 versus 579, again 2.8% ahead. The R23 results follow the same pattern: multicore 10046 versus 9775, and singlecore 1418 versus 1380, both at 2.8% deltas.

The consistency of these margins is notable. Across all six tests, the Xeon's advantage ranges only from 2.7% to 2.9%. This indicates a stable architectural performance gap rather than workload-specific variability. The Core i7's higher boost clock of 5.00 GHz does not translate into a singlecore win, as the Xeon's 4.50 GHz boost still outperforms it in every singlecore test.

The Core i7's Geekbench results, which are absent from the Xeon's record, provide additional data points. Its singlecore score of 1800 and multicore score of 5383 place it in the 52nd percentile overall, slightly above the Xeon's 51st percentile. The average benchmark score of 3018 for the Core i7 versus 2905 for the Xeon gives the mobile chip a 3.9% overall average advantage, driven entirely by the Geekbench tests that the Xeon lacks.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i7-11375H has the higher average at 3018, compared to the Intel Xeon E-2414's 2905, a difference of 3.9%.

Q: Does the Xeon E-2414 support ECC memory?

A: Yes, ECC memory is supported on the Xeon E-2414. The Core i7-11375H does not support ECC memory.

Q: What is the core and thread count difference?

A: Both processors have 4 physical cores. The Xeon E-2414 has 4 threads total, while the Core i7-11375H has 8 threads through simultaneous multithreading.

Q: Which chip has integrated graphics?

A: The Core i7-11375H includes Iris XE 96EU integrated graphics. The Xeon E-2414 has no integrated graphics.

Q: How does the memory support differ?

A: The Xeon E-2414 supports DDR5 memory with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Core i7-11375H supports DDR4 memory with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. Both use dual-channel configuration.

Q: What is the release timeline for these two processors?

A: The Core i7-11375H was released in January 2021. The Xeon E-2414 was released in December 2023.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification category. Clock speeds: the Xeon E-2414 runs at 2.60 GHz base and 4.50 GHz boost, while the Core i7-11375H runs at 3.00 GHz base and 5.00 GHz boost. Thread counts: 4 for the Xeon versus 8 for the Core i7. TDP: 55 watts for the Xeon versus 28 watts for the Core i7.

Socket and platform: the Xeon uses Intel Socket 1700, the Core i7 uses Intel BGA 1449. Architecture: Raptor Lake-S versus Tiger Lake-H. Die size: 163 mm² versus 146.1 mm². Memory type: DDR5 versus DDR4. Memory bandwidth: 76.8 GB/s versus 51.2 GB/s. ECC support: yes versus no. PCIe generation: Gen 5 with 16 lanes versus Gen 4 with 20 lanes. Integrated graphics: none versus Iris XE 96EU. Market segment: server and workstation versus mobile. Release date: December 2023 versus January 2021.

The cache hierarchy is identical: 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 12 MB shared L3 on both chips. The process node is the same at 10 nm, and both are manufactured by Intel. Both processors have locked multipliers, meaning no overclocking headroom through the multiplier. The Xeon's part number is SRMXD, and the Core i7's is SRKH4.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion for workstation users. The Xeon E-2414 wins every shared benchmark, supports ECC memory, uses faster DDR5 with higher bandwidth, and comes from a newer architecture generation. Its consistent 2.7% to 2.9% lead across all Cinebench tests makes it the reliable choice for threaded rendering and compute workloads in a server or workstation context. The lack of integrated graphics is irrelevant in systems that use discrete GPUs, which is typical for its target segment.

The Core i7-11375H, despite losing every head-to-head test, still holds appeal for mobile deployments. Its higher average benchmark score of 3018, driven by Geekbench results, and its 52nd percentile ranking show competitive overall performance. The integrated Iris XE 96EU graphics eliminate the need for a separate GPU in compact systems. The lower 28 watt TDP makes it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where thermal headroom is limited. Its higher base and boost clocks suggest better responsiveness in lightly threaded tasks, even if the measured Cinebench singlecore results do not reflect that advantage.

The choice hinges on platform priorities. For ECC memory, DDR5 support, and a socketed workstation platform, the Xeon E-2414 is the data-backed pick. For a mobile chip with integrated graphics, higher average benchmark scores, and lower power consumption, the Core i7-11375H is the one the measurements favor. The Xeon is the better raw performer in rendering workloads; the Core i7 is the better all-rounder in the broader benchmark suite. Neither chip dominates the other completely, but the Xeon's clean sweep of the shared tests gives it the edge for users who care specifically about Cinebench-class workloads.