Intel Core i7-4940MX vs Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 and the Intel Core i7-4940MX are both Haswell-era parts, but they target opposite ends of the computing spectrum: one is a server workhorse, the other a mobile flagship. The benchmark data shows a clear, consistent pattern across all tested workloads, with the Xeon winning every single head-to-head test despite the i7’s higher clock speeds. The Xeon’s advantage stems from its additional cores and threads, which outweigh the i7’s frequency lead in every Cinebench iteration.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Xeon E5-2620 v3 dominates the Core i7-4940MX in every benchmark test recorded. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 664 against the i7’s 580, a 14.5% advantage. The single-core test tells the same story, with the Xeon at 93 and the i7 at 81, a 14.8% edge for the Xeon. This is notable because the i7-4940MX has a higher base clock (3.10 GHz vs 2.40 GHz) and a higher boost clock (4.00 GHz vs 3.20 GHz), yet still loses in single-threaded performance. The data suggests the Xeon’s architecture implementation or cache hierarchy provides a meaningful per-clock advantage.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the pattern holds. The Xeon scores 2769 multi-core and 391 single-core, while the i7 manages 2418 and 341 respectively. The deltas are 14.5% and 14.7%, nearly identical to the R15 results. This consistency across benchmark versions indicates a stable architectural difference rather than a workload-specific anomaly.

Cinebench R23 confirms the trend with the Xeon at 6595 multi-core and 931 single-core, versus the i7’s 5759 and 813. The multi-core delta is again 14.5%, and the single-core delta is 14.5%. The i7-4940MX does have one additional benchmark in its favor: Geekbench, where it scores 3869 multi-core and 1227 single-core. However, the Xeon has no Geekbench results in the data, so no direct comparison is possible there.

The average benchmark score tells a similar story, though slightly compressed. The Xeon averages 1907 across its tests, while the i7 averages 1886. This places the Xeon at the 43rd percentile of all CPUs, and the i7 at the same 43rd percentile. The Xeon’s nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon E3-1285 v4 (1908, 0% delta) and AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400GE (1910, -0.2% delta). The i7’s nearest rivals are the Intel Xeon D-1531 (1885, 0.1% delta) and Intel Xeon E3-1270L v4 (1883, 0.2% delta). The Xeon’s average score is only 21 points higher than the i7’s, but the head-to-head Cinebench results show a more pronounced gap.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon E5-2620 v3 wins every head-to-head benchmark in the data set. Its six cores and twelve threads provide a clear multi-threaded advantage, but the single-core wins are more surprising given the i7’s frequency advantage. The Xeon’s 15 MB of shared L3 cache, compared to the i7’s 8 MB, likely contributes to this result by keeping more data closer to the cores.

The Core i7-4940MX, despite losing all six Cinebench comparisons, has its own strengths. It is the only one of the two with integrated graphics (Intel HD 4600), which the Xeon lacks entirely. This makes the i7 a viable option for systems without a discrete GPU. The i7 also has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking, while the Xeon’s multiplier is locked. For users who prioritize maximum frequency in a mobile form factor, the i7’s 4.00 GHz boost clock is its best asset, even if it does not translate to benchmark wins here.

The i7 also has a significant advantage in power efficiency. Its 57-watt TDP is substantially lower than the Xeon’s 85-watt TDP. In a laptop, this difference is critical for thermal management and battery life. The i7’s smaller die size (177 mm² vs 356 mm²) and lower transistor count (1,400 million vs 2,600 million) contribute to its lower power draw.

Architecture Differences

Both CPUs are built on Intel’s 22 nm process and use the Haswell microarchitecture, but they are distinct implementations. The Xeon E5-2620 v3 is codenamed Haswell-EP and belongs to the Xeon E5 generation. It uses the Intel Socket 2011-3 platform, which supports quad-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The i7-4940MX is codenamed Haswell and belongs to the Core i7 Extreme generation. It uses the Intel Socket G3 platform and supports dual-channel DDR3 memory with a bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s. This memory bandwidth difference is substantial and favors the Xeon in memory-intensive workloads.

The core configurations differ significantly. The Xeon has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the i7 has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Xeon’s L3 cache is 15 MB shared, versus the i7’s 8 MB shared. Both have 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core. The Xeon’s larger cache and higher core count are its primary architectural advantages.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Xeon provides 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU, while the i7 provides 16 lanes. This makes the Xeon far better suited for multi-GPU setups or high-bandwidth expansion cards. The Xeon supports ECC memory, which the i7 does not. The i7 includes integrated graphics, while the Xeon has none.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every specification that matters. The core count is 6 versus 4, and the thread count is 12 versus 8. The Xeon has a lower base clock at 2.40 GHz versus the i7’s 3.10 GHz, and a lower boost clock at 3.20 GHz versus 4.00 GHz. The Xeon’s TDP is higher at 85 watts versus 57 watts.

Memory support is a major differentiator. The Xeon uses DDR4 with a quad-channel bus, achieving 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The i7 uses DDR3 with a dual-channel bus, achieving 25.6 GB/s. ECC memory is supported only on the Xeon. The sockets are incompatible: Socket 2011-3 for the Xeon, Socket G3 for the i7.

The die size and transistor counts reflect their different roles. The Xeon has 2,600 million transistors on a 356 mm² die, while the i7 has 1,400 million on a 177 mm² die. The Xeon’s launch MSRP was $417, while the i7’s was $1096. The i7 has an unlocked multiplier; the Xeon does not. The i7 includes Intel HD 4600 integrated graphics; the Xeon has none.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core i7-4940MX has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Does the Core i7-4940MX have a higher clock speed than the Xeon?

A: Yes. The i7 has a base clock of 3.10 GHz and a boost clock of 4.00 GHz. The Xeon has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.20 GHz.

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: Only the Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 supports ECC memory. The Core i7-4940MX does not.

Q: Can either processor be overclocked?

A: The Core i7-4940MX has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking. The Xeon E5-2620 v3 has a locked multiplier.

Q: What type of memory does each CPU support?

A: The Xeon supports DDR4 memory with a quad-channel bus. The i7 supports DDR3 memory with a dual-channel bus.

Q: Which CPU has integrated graphics?

A: Only the Core i7-4940MX has integrated graphics (Intel HD 4600). The Xeon E5-2620 v3 has none.

The Verdict

The data points to a decisive win for the Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 in raw processing power. It beats the Core i7-4940MX by roughly 14.5% in every Cinebench test, both multi-core and single-core. This is despite the i7’s higher clocks and lower TDP. The Xeon’s six cores, twelve threads, and larger 15 MB cache give it a structural advantage that clock speed cannot overcome. Its quad-channel DDR4 memory support and 40 PCIe lanes make it the obvious choice for server or workstation tasks involving heavy compute, large datasets, or multiple expansion cards.

The Core i7-4940MX is not without merit, but its strengths lie outside the benchmark data. It is a mobile processor with a 57-watt TDP, integrated graphics, and an unlocked multiplier. For a laptop user who values low power draw and overclocking potential, the i7 makes sense. Its 4.00 GHz boost clock is the highest of the two, and its smaller die makes it suitable for compact systems. However, it loses to the Xeon on every recorded performance test, and its dual-channel DDR3 memory bandwidth is less than half the Xeon’s.

Choose the Xeon E5-2620 v3 if you need maximum multi-threaded throughput, ECC memory support, or high-bandwidth memory. Choose the Core i7-4940MX if you are building a mobile system where power efficiency, integrated graphics, or overclocking take priority. The Xeon is the stronger performer; the i7 is the more flexible mobile part. The data is unambiguous about which is faster, but the right choice depends entirely on the use case.