Intel Core i7-2860QM vs Intel Xeon E5630 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core i7-2860QM dominates the Intel Xeon E5630 across every recorded benchmark. The database shows a clean sweep: 5 wins for the mobile chip, 0 for the server part. The margins are remarkably consistent, hovering around the 20% mark in all five tests.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i7-2860QM scores 390 against the Xeon's 324, a 20.4% advantage. The R20 multi-core test shows a similar gap: 1626 versus 1354, or 20.1% ahead. The R23 multi-core result continues the pattern at 3873 versus 3226, a 20.1% lead. These multi-core numbers are notable because both processors have the same core and thread count, so the difference comes entirely from architectural efficiency and clock behavior.

Single-core performance tells the same story. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i7-2860QM scores 229 against 191, a 19.9% edge. The R23 single-core test shows 546 versus 455, a 20% difference. The consistency of these deltas across different workload intensities suggests a fundamental performance advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

The average benchmark scores in the broader database place these chips nearly level: the i7-2860QM averages 1120, while the Xeon E5630 averages 1110. Both sit at the 32nd and 31st percentiles of all CPUs respectively. The i7-2860QM's nearest rivals include the AMD Athlon 240GE at 1121 (0% delta), the Intel Xeon D-1518 at 1121 (-0.1%), and the Intel Core i3-4150 at 1119 (0.1%). The Xeon E5630's closest competitors are the Intel Core i7-5557U at 1110 (0% delta), the Intel Xeon E5-2609 v3 at 1109 (0.1%), and the Intel Core i5-4570T at 1108 (0.2%). These percentile positions show that while the two chips are close in aggregate, the head-to-head tests reveal a decisive winner.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel architectures and target different market segments. The i7-2860QM is built on Sandy Bridge, released in September 2011, and belongs to the Core i7 mobile lineup. The Xeon E5630 uses the Westmere-EP architecture, released in March 2010, and targets server and workstation deployments.

Both chips use the same 32 nm process node and are fabricated by Intel. Transistor counts are nearly identical: 1,160 million for the i7-2860QM versus 1,170 million for the Xeon E5630. Die sizes differ slightly, with the mobile chip measuring 216 mm² and the server chip at 239 mm².

Core configurations match: 4 cores and 8 threads each. Base clocks are close, with the i7-2860QM at 2.50 GHz and the Xeon E5630 at 2.53 GHz. The boost clocks diverge significantly: the i7-2860QM reaches 3.60 GHz, while the Xeon E5630 tops out at 2.80 GHz. That 0.80 GHz boost advantage explains much of the performance gap in single-threaded workloads.

Cache hierarchies differ in the shared L3. The i7-2860QM has 8 MB shared L3, while the Xeon E5630 has 12 MB shared L3. Both have 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core. The larger L3 on the Xeon does not compensate for its lower boost clock in the recorded benchmarks.

Memory architecture separates these chips further. The i7-2860QM uses dual-channel memory without ECC support. The Xeon E5630 uses triple-channel memory with ECC support and supports DDR3 memory types. The Xeon also carries PCIe Gen 2 support, while the database records no PCIe generation for the mobile part.

Integrated graphics is another differentiator. The i7-2860QM includes Intel HD 3000 graphics, while the Xeon E5630 has no integrated graphics at all. This makes sense given their target platforms: the mobile chip needs an all-in-one solution, while the server chip expects a discrete GPU or no display output.

Sockets are incompatible. The i7-2860QM uses Intel Socket G2 (988B), a mobile socket. The Xeon E5630 uses Intel Socket 1366, a server platform. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier.

Thermal design power differs substantially. The i7-2860QM has a 45 W TDP, while the Xeon E5630 draws 80 W. The mobile chip delivers better performance at lower power, a direct consequence of its newer architecture and higher boost clock.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Core i7-2860QM wins all recorded multi-core tests. In Cinebench R15, it scores 390 versus 324 (20.4% ahead). In R20, it scores 1626 versus 1354 (20.1% ahead). In R23, it scores 3873 versus 3226 (20.1% ahead).

Q: Do both processors have the same core and thread counts?

A: Yes. Both have 4 cores and 8 threads. The performance difference does not come from core count, but from clock speeds and architecture efficiency.

Q: Does the Xeon E5630 have any advantages?

A: The Xeon E5630 offers ECC memory support, triple-channel memory, and a larger 12 MB shared L3 cache. It also has PCIe Gen 2 support. None of these features close the benchmark gap in the recorded tests.

Q: What is the single-core performance difference?

A: The i7-2860QM leads by about 20% in single-core tests. Cinebench R20 single-core shows 229 versus 191 (19.9% ahead), and R23 single-core shows 546 versus 455 (20% ahead).

Q: Which chip has a lower power draw?

A: The i7-2860QM has a 45 W TDP, while the Xeon E5630 has an 80 W TDP. The mobile chip achieves higher performance at nearly half the thermal envelope.

Q: Are these processors still in production?

A: Both are marked as end-of-life in the database. The i7-2860QM was released in September 2011, and the Xeon E5630 was released in March 2010.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a clear conclusion: the Intel Core i7-2860QM outperforms the Intel Xeon E5630 across every benchmark in the database. The 20% margins in multi-core and single-core tests are consistent and decisive. The i7-2860QM achieves this with a 45 W TDP, lower than the Xeon's 80 W, and with a smaller 8 MB L3 cache.

The Xeon E5630 does offer server-relevant features: ECC memory, triple-channel memory, and PCIe Gen 2. For workloads that depend on those capabilities, the Xeon remains a viable platform choice. But raw compute performance favors the i7-2860QM without exception.

The percentile data places both chips near each other in the global rankings: 32nd for the i7-2860QM and 31st for the Xeon E5630. However, the head-to-head tests show that close aggregate positioning masks a lopsided matchup. The i7-2860QM's higher boost clock, newer architecture, and lower power draw make it the better performer in this comparison.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i7-2860QM | Intel Xeon E5630 |

| --- | --- | --- |

| Architecture | Sandy Bridge | Westmere |

| Codename | Sandy Bridge | Westmere-EP |

| Generation | Core i7 (Sandy Bridge) | Xeon (Westmere-EP) |

| Base Clock | 2.50 GHz | 2.53 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.60 GHz | 2.80 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 80 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket G2 (988B) | Intel Socket 1366 |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | 12 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Triple-channel |

| ECC Memory | False | True |

| PCIe | Not recorded | Gen 2 |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 3000 | None |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Server/Workstation |

| Part Number | SR02X | SLBVB |

The two chips share a process node (32 nm), transistor count (roughly 1,160 to 1,170 million), core count (4), thread count (8), L1 cache (64 KB per core), and L2 cache (256 KB per core). Both are end-of-life products with locked multipliers.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-2860QM wins in every recorded compute benchmark. Its advantages are most pronounced in single-threaded tasks, where the 3.60 GHz boost clock against the Xeon's 2.80 GHz produces a 20% lead. Multi-threaded workloads also favor the i7-2860QM by the same margin, despite identical core and thread counts. The mobile chip also wins on power efficiency, delivering higher scores at nearly half the TDP.

The Intel Xeon E5630 wins on platform features rather than raw performance. It supports ECC memory, which the i7-2860QM does not. It uses triple-channel memory for potentially higher memory bandwidth in memory-sensitive server workloads. It includes PCIe Gen 2 support. Its larger 12 MB L3 cache could benefit workloads with high cache reuse, though the recorded benchmarks do not show this advantage translating into score gains.

The use cases split cleanly: the i7-2860QM suits mobile and general-purpose computing where performance per watt matters and integrated graphics are acceptable. The Xeon E5630 suits server and workstation builds that require ECC memory reliability, triple-channel memory configurations, and PCIe Gen 2 connectivity, even at the cost of lower compute performance. Anyone choosing between these two should prioritize the i7-2860QM for speed and efficiency, or the Xeon E5630 for its server-specific feature set.