Intel Core i7-1375PRE vs Intel Xeon W-2150B Comparison

The Intel Xeon W-2150B and the Intel Core i7-1375PRE are separated by five years of silicon evolution, yet their average benchmark scores are nearly identical. The Xeon W-2150B edges out a win in every single head-to-head test, but the margins are razor-thin, ranging from 0.4% to 0.8%. This is a classic clash of a workstation platform with high core count and memory bandwidth against a modern mobile chip with a higher boost clock and newer architecture. The data indicates that the Xeon W-2150B holds a slight performance lead in sustained multi-threaded and single-threaded workloads, while the i7-1375PRE counters with drastically lower power consumption, a newer process node, and integrated graphics.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results paint a clear picture: the Intel Xeon W-2150B wins in every benchmark category included in the dataset. It takes the multi-core tests with scores of 1750 in Cinebench R15, 7294 in R20, and 17368 in R23, against the i7-1375PRE’s 1737, 7239, and 17236 respectively. The advantage is consistent, with deltas of 0.7% to 0.8% in multi-core workloads, suggesting that the older chip’s higher base clock and quad-channel memory configuration provide a tangible, albeit small, benefit in rendering and compute-heavy tasks.

In single-core tests, the Xeon W-2150B also prevails, scoring 246 in R15, 1029 in R20, and 2452 in R23, compared to the i7-1375PRE’s 245, 1021, and 2433. The deltas here are 0.4% to 0.8%, which is surprising given the i7’s higher 4.80 GHz boost clock versus the Xeon’s 4.50 GHz. The data suggests that the Xeon’s Skylake architecture extracts more instructions per clock in these legacy Cinebench workloads, or that the benchmark favors the Xeon’s memory subsystem. The i7-1375PRE’s wins are not in performance but in efficiency and platform features: it is a 28W part versus a 120W part, and it includes integrated graphics, which the Xeon lacks entirely.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is substantial. The Intel Xeon W-2150B is built on Intel’s 14 nm process and uses the Skylake-W architecture, released in late 2017. It features 10 cores and 20 threads, with a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. Its cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 13.75 MB L3 cache. The chip is designed for the Intel Socket 2066 platform, supports quad-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 85.3 GB/s, and includes ECC memory support. It also offers 48 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, making it a true workstation-class processor. Its die size is a massive 484 mm², reflecting the older process node and the large number of I/O and memory controllers.

The Intel Core i7-1375PRE is a modern mobile part from the Raptor Lake-P family, launched in early 2023. It uses a 10 nm process (Intel’s enhanced version) and features 14 cores and 20 threads, with a base clock of 1.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. Its cache is larger: 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 24 MB L3 cache. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, but does not support ECC memory. The i7-1375PRE is built for the Intel BGA 1744 socket, has 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, and includes Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units. Its die size is 217 mm², less than half of the Xeon’s, due to the denser process node and mobile-focused design.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result is the consistency of the Xeon W-2150B’s victory. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 1750 against 1737, a 0.7% advantage. This is a workload where the Xeon’s quad-channel memory bandwidth and higher base clock (3.00 GHz vs. 1.90 GHz) help it overcome the i7’s four extra cores. The i7-1375PRE has 14 cores but a low base clock, which likely hampers it in short, bursty render tasks that do not scale perfectly with thread count.

In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the Xeon wins 7294 to 7239, a 0.8% delta. The pattern holds in R23 multi-core, where the Xeon scores 17368 against 17236, again a 0.8% difference. The margins are small enough that they could be within run-to-run variance, but the fact that the Xeon wins all six tests suggests a systematic, if minor, performance advantage.

The single-core results are tighter. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Xeon scores 246 against 245, a 0.4% delta. In R20 single-core, it is 1029 against 1021, a 0.8% delta. In R23 single-core, it is 2452 against 2433, a 0.8% delta. The i7-1375PRE’s higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz does not translate into a win, indicating that the Xeon’s older but more power-hungry architecture delivers comparable or better single-thread performance in these specific tests. The data does not include Geekbench results for the i7-1375PRE, but the Xeon scores 8481 multi-core and 1314 single-core there.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Xeon W-2150B has an average benchmark score of 4992, while the Intel Core i7-1375PRE scores 4985. The Xeon’s score is 0.1% higher.

Q: Does the Intel Core i7-1375PRE have more cores than the Xeon W-2150B?

A: Yes, the i7-1375PRE has 14 cores, while the Xeon W-2150B has 10 cores. Both have 20 threads.

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: Only the Intel Xeon W-2150B supports ECC memory. The Core i7-1375PRE does not.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two processors?

A: The Xeon W-2150B has a TDP of 120W, whereas the Core i7-1375PRE has a TDP of 28W.

Q: Which processor includes integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core i7-1375PRE includes Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units. The Xeon W-2150B has no integrated graphics.

Q: How do their memory channels compare?

A: The Xeon W-2150B supports quad-channel DDR4 memory with 85.3 GB/s bandwidth, while the Core i7-1375PRE supports dual-channel DDR4 and DDR5 memory, with no bandwidth figure listed.

Specification Differences

The key specification differences are the following:

• Cores: 10 (Xeon W-2150B) vs 14 (i7-1375PRE)
• Base Clock: 3.00 GHz vs 1.90 GHz
• Boost Clock: 4.50 GHz vs 4.80 GHz
• TDP: 120W vs 28W
• Socket: Intel Socket 2066 vs Intel BGA 1744
• Architecture: Skylake vs Raptor Lake
• Process Node: 14 nm vs 10 nm
• Die Size: 484 mm² vs 217 mm²
• L1 Cache: 64 KB (per core) vs 80 KB (per core)
• L2 Cache: 1 MB (per core) vs 2 MB (per core)
• L3 Cache: 13.75 MB (shared) vs 24 MB (shared)
• Memory Support: DDR4 only vs DDR4 and DDR5
• Memory Bus: Quad-channel vs Dual-channel
• Memory Bandwidth: 85.3 GB/s vs null
• ECC Memory: true vs false
• PCIe: Gen 3, 48 Lanes vs Gen 4, 20 Lanes
• Integrated Graphics: null vs Iris Xe Graphics 96EU
• Production Status: End-of-life vs Active
• Release Date: 2017-12-20 vs 2023-01-03

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon W-2150B is the faster processor in every benchmark recorded. If raw performance in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 is the sole criterion, the Xeon is the pick, despite being an older, end-of-life product. Its wins are consistent across all six tests, with deltas between 0.4% and 0.8%. This is a marginal victory, but a sweep nonetheless. The Xeon’s quad-channel memory and higher base clock appear to outweigh the i7-1375PRE’s additional cores and newer architecture in these workloads.

However, the Intel Core i7-1375PRE is the rational choice for mobile or power-constrained environments. Its 28W TDP is a fraction of the Xeon’s 120W, making it suitable for laptops and compact systems where cooling and battery life are critical. It also brings modern features like PCIe Gen 4, DDR5 memory support, and integrated graphics, which the Xeon lacks entirely. The i7-1375PRE is active and current, whereas the Xeon is end-of-life. For a user building a new system from the data provided, the Xeon wins on performance but loses on platform longevity and efficiency. The i7-1375PRE offers 99.9% of the Xeon’s average performance (4985 vs 4992) while being a far more practical, modern, and efficient part. The verdict is simple: choose the Xeon W-2150B for legacy workstation builds where every bit of multi-core score matters, and choose the Core i7-1375PRE for anything requiring low power, integrated graphics, or a current platform.