Intel Core i7-11375H vs Intel Xeon E5-1650 v4 Comparison

The Intel Core i7-11375H and Intel Xeon E5-1650 v4 are two very different processors that land at nearly the same average benchmark score. The Core i7-11375H wins 7 of 8 head-to-head tests, yet the Xeon E5-1650 v4 takes the single largest margin in the entire comparison. The data shows a mobile Tiger Lake chip with a 5.00 GHz boost clock outclassing a six-core Broadwell-EP server part in most workloads, while the Xeon’s quad-channel memory and larger core count give it a specific edge in Geekbench multi-core performance.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i7-11375H has an average benchmark score of 3018, while the Intel Xeon E5-1650 v4 scores 2978. The Core i7 leads by 1.3% based on the deltaPct in its nearestRivals list.

Q: How do the two chips compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Core i7-11375H scores 9775 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the Xeon E5-1650 v4 scores 9592. The Core i7 wins by 1.9%.

Q: Which processor has higher single-core performance?

A: The Core i7-11375H dominates single-core tests. In Geekbench single-core, it scores 1800 versus 1122 for the Xeon, a 60.4% advantage. It also leads in all four Cinebench single-core tests.

Q: Does the Xeon E5-1650 v4 win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, the Xeon wins the Geekbench multi-core test with a score of 6060 versus 5383 for the Core i7, giving it an 11.2% margin.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Core i7-11375H has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Xeon E5-1650 v4 has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Xeon E5-1650 v4 supports ECC memory, while the Core i7-11375H does not.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different eras and design philosophies. The Core i7-11375H uses the Tiger Lake architecture on a 10 nm process node, with a die size of 146.1 mm². The Xeon E5-1650 v4 uses the Broadwell architecture on a 14 nm process node, with a die size of 246 mm² and 3,400 million transistors. The Core i7 is built for mobile devices with a 28 W TDP, while the Xeon is a desktop part with a 140 W TDP.

Cache layouts differ substantially. The Core i7 has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Xeon has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 15 MB of shared L3 cache. The Xeon’s larger total L3 and per-core L2 reflect its server heritage, but the Core i7’s newer architecture compensates with higher clock speeds.

Memory support also diverges. Both support DDR4, but the Core i7 uses a dual-channel bus with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, while the Xeon uses a quad-channel bus with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, while the Core i7 does not. PCIe capabilities differ: the Core i7 offers Gen 4 with 20 lanes, while the Xeon offers Gen 3 with 40 lanes. The Core i7 includes integrated Iris XE 96EU graphics, whereas the Xeon has no integrated graphics.

The Core i7 has a base clock of 3.00 GHz and boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Xeon has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and boost of 4.00 GHz. The Core i7’s boost advantage of 1.00 GHz is a key factor in its single-core dominance. The Xeon’s higher base clock does not translate to benchmark wins, as the Core i7 wins every Cinebench test.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Core i7-11375H wins 7 of 8 head-to-head benchmarks, but the margins are not uniform. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Core i7 scores 985 versus 966 for the Xeon, a 2% win. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Core i7 scores 138 versus 136, a 1.5% win. The Cinebench R20 tests show the Core i7 ahead by 1.9% in both multi-core (4105 vs 4028) and single-core (579 vs 568).

Cinebench R23 follows the same pattern. The Core i7 scores 9775 in multi-core versus 9592 for the Xeon, a 1.9% win. In single-core, the Core i7 scores 1380 versus 1354, another 1.9% win. These consistent margins suggest the Core i7’s architecture delivers a small but reliable advantage across all Cinebench versions.

The Geekbench results tell a different story. In Geekbench multi-core, the Xeon scores 6060 versus 5383 for the Core i7, an 11.2% win for the Xeon. This is the largest delta in the entire comparison, and it flips the overall narrative. However, in Geekbench single-core, the Core i7 scores 1800 versus 1122 for the Xeon, a massive 60.4% advantage. This single test shows the Core i7’s single-threaded prowess is roughly 60% better than the Xeon’s.

The average benchmark scores reflect these mixed results. The Core i7’s average is 3018, and the Xeon’s is 2978, a difference of 1.3%. Both processors fall at the 52nd percentile of all CPUs, meaning they sit in the same performance tier overall.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split: the Core i7-11375H is the better all-around performer for most workloads, while the Xeon E5-1650 v4 has a specific niche. The Core i7 wins all four Cinebench multi-core tests and all four single-core tests, plus Geekbench single-core. That is 7 wins out of 8. The only loss is Geekbench multi-core, where the Xeon’s 11.2% margin is substantial.

For users prioritizing single-threaded performance, the Core i7 is the obvious choice. Its 60.4% lead in Geekbench single-core and consistent 1.5-1.9% leads across Cinebench single-core tests indicate a generational advantage in per-core efficiency. The Core i7’s 5.00 GHz boost clock versus the Xeon’s 4.00 GHz boost clock directly supports this finding.

For users who need multi-core Geekbench performance, the Xeon wins. Its 6 cores and 12 threads, combined with quad-channel memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, give it an 11.2% edge in that specific test. However, this advantage does not carry over to Cinebench multi-core, where the Core i7 leads by 1.9% despite having fewer cores.

The production statuses reinforce the verdict. The Core i7 is Active, while the Xeon is End-of-life. The Core i7 also has integrated graphics, making it a more complete package for systems without a discrete GPU. The Xeon’s ECC memory support and 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes are server-oriented features, but they do not translate to benchmark wins outside Geekbench multi-core.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every specification category. The Core i7 has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Xeon has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Core i7’s base clock is 3.00 GHz versus the Xeon’s 3.60 GHz, but the boost clock favors the Core i7 at 5.00 GHz versus 4.00 GHz.

TDP is a major divider: the Core i7 runs at 28 W, the Xeon at 140 W. The socket types are incompatible, with the Core i7 using Intel BGA 1449 and the Xeon using Intel Socket 2011-3. Process nodes differ, with the Core i7 on 10 nm and the Xeon on 14 nm.

Cache configurations are distinct. The Core i7 has 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 12 MB shared L3. The Xeon has 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 15 MB shared L3. The Xeon’s die size is 246 mm² versus 146.1 mm² for the Core i7, and the Xeon has 3,400 million transistors while the Core i7’s transistor count is not listed.

Memory support shows the Xeon’s server focus: it supports quad-channel memory with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth and ECC, while the Core i7 is dual-channel with 51.2 GB/s and no ECC. PCIe generations differ, with the Core i7 on Gen 4 with 20 lanes and the Xeon on Gen 3 with 40 lanes. Integrated graphics are present only on the Core i7 (Iris XE 96EU), while the Xeon has none.

Other differences include market segment (Mobile vs Desktop), production status (Active vs End-of-life), release date (2021-01-10 for the Core i7, 2016-06-19 for the Xeon), and launch MSRP ($482 for the Core i7, $621 for the Xeon). The part numbers also differ: SRKH4 for the Core i7, SR2P7 for the Xeon.

Where Each One Wins

The Core i7-11375H wins in every Cinebench test, including multi-core. Its 1.9% margins in Cinebench R20 and R23 multi-core show that newer architecture can overcome a core deficit. The Core i7 also wins Geekbench single-core by 60.4%, making it the clear choice for applications that rely on single-threaded speed, such as light gaming, office productivity, and legacy software.

The Xeon E5-1650 v4 wins Geekbench multi-core by 11.2%. This suggests it is better suited for workloads that are optimized for Geekbench’s specific multi-threaded test pattern, which may favor the Xeon’s higher core count and quad-channel memory bandwidth. The Xeon’s ECC memory support and 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes also make it more appropriate for server or workstation environments where data integrity and expansion are priorities.

The overall win count favors the Core i7 at 7 to 1. However, the Xeon’s single win is the largest margin in the comparison at 11.2%. Users should weigh the importance of Geekbench multi-core against the Core i7’s dominance across all Cinebench tests and single-core performance. The Core i7 is also the only one with integrated graphics, making it a more versatile mobile solution. The Xeon, with its higher launch MSRP of $621 and end-of-life status, offers fewer reasons for adoption outside its specific Geekbench multi-core strength.