Intel Core i7-5700HQ vs Intel Xeon E5-2623 v3 Comparison

Intel Core i7-5700HQ and Intel Xeon E5-2623 v3 are both 4-core, 8-thread Intel parts from the same era, but they target very different platforms. The benchmark data shows a consistent, if modest, performance advantage for the Xeon across every test, yet the i7-5700HQ counters with dramatically lower power consumption and a mobile socket. The choice between them depends entirely on whether you need a low-power mobile chip or a server/workstation processor with platform features like ECC and quad-channel memory.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are remarkably one-sided. The Intel Xeon E5-2623 v3 wins all six benchmark comparisons, with the i7-5700HQ trailing by nearly the same margin in every test. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Xeon scores 568 against the i7's 519, a delta of -8.6%. The single-core R15 result is closer in percentage terms but still favors the Xeon: 79 versus 73, a -7.6% gap.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the pattern holds. The Xeon posts 2367 in multicore versus 2164 for the i7, again a -8.6% difference. In R20 single-core, the Xeon's 333 beats the i7's 305 by -8.4%. The latest Cinebench R23 results show the same story: the Xeon reaches 5637 multicore and 795 single-core, while the i7 manages 5154 and 727 respectively. Every single-core and multicore delta lands between -7.6% and -8.6%, indicating the Xeon's advantage is consistent across both lightly-threaded and fully-threaded workloads.

It is worth remembering the i7-5700HQ holds its own in the Geekbench tests, which are not part of the head-to-head table but appear in its benchmark list. The i7 scores 3129 in Geekbench multicore and 1085 in single-core. However, without equivalent Geekbench scores for the Xeon, the Cinebench results remain the definitive comparison. The Xeon's average benchmark score of 1630 is slightly lower than the i7's 1645 average, which seems contradictory given the head-to-head sweep. This is because the i7's average includes Geekbench results, which are not available for the Xeon, so the overall averages are not directly comparable across the same test suite. The head-to-head data is the reliable reference, and it clearly favors the Xeon.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and manufacturing processes. The i7-5700HQ is built on Broadwell-H, using a 14 nm process with a die size of 182 mm². The Xeon E5-2623 v3 is Haswell-EP on a 22 nm process, with a much larger 356 mm² die and 2,600 million transistors. The smaller process node gives the i7 a theoretical efficiency advantage, but the Xeon's larger die accommodates more cache and platform features.

Cache configuration differs significantly. Both have 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core, but the shared L3 cache is where they diverge: the i7 has 6 MB shared L3, while the Xeon has 10 MB shared L3. That extra 4 MB likely contributes to the Xeon's consistent benchmark lead. The i7's base clock is 2.70 GHz with a 3.50 GHz boost, while the Xeon starts higher at 3.00 GHz and also boosts to 3.50 GHz. The higher base clock gives the Xeon an advantage in sustained workloads that do not hit boost conditions.

Memory support is a major differentiator. The i7-5700HQ uses dual-channel DDR3 with a memory bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s, while the Xeon supports quad-channel DDR4 with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth—exactly double. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, which the i7 does not. PCIe lanes also differ: the i7 provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes, while the Xeon offers Gen 3 with 40 lanes. The i7 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD 5600), while the Xeon has none. The i7 is a 47 W part on Intel BGA 1364, whereas the Xeon is a 105 W part on Intel Socket 2011-3. Both are end-of-life products with locked multipliers, and neither is overclockable.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon E5-2623 v3 wins every benchmark in the head-to-head, but the magnitude of that win is small—roughly 8-9% across the board. This makes it the better choice for raw compute performance, especially in multi-threaded applications where the larger L3 cache and higher base clock can be leveraged. Its quad-channel DDR4 memory and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth are critical for memory-intensive server workloads, database processing, or virtualization. The 40 PCIe lanes allow for multiple GPUs or high-speed storage cards without a chipset bottleneck. ECC memory support is non-negotiable for systems that require data integrity in scientific computing or financial modeling.

The i7-5700HQ's wins are not in benchmark scores but in platform characteristics. Its 47 W TDP is less than half the Xeon's 105 W, making it suitable for compact or thermally constrained systems. The integrated Intel HD 5600 GPU eliminates the need for a discrete graphics card in basic display tasks. The BGA 1364 socket means it is soldered to the board, which is typical for laptops or mini-PCs, but it also means no CPU upgrades. The i7 is the better choice for a low-power workstation or a mobile system where the Xeon's socket, power draw, and lack of iGPU would be disqualifying. For pure compute, the Xeon wins; for efficiency and integrated graphics, the i7 wins.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2623 v3 scores 5637, while the Intel Core i7-5700HQ scores 5154. The Xeon is 8.6% faster.

Q: Does the i7-5700HQ support ECC memory?

A: No. The i7-5700HQ does not support ECC memory, while the Xeon E5-2623 v3 does.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The Xeon E5-2623 v3 has 59.7 GB/s bandwidth with quad-channel DDR4, exactly double the i7-5700HQ's 29.9 GB/s with dual-channel DDR3.

Q: Do both CPUs have the same core and thread count?

A: Yes, both have 4 cores and 8 threads, and both have a 3.50 GHz boost clock.

Q: Which CPU has a smaller manufacturing process?

A: The i7-5700HQ is built on a 14 nm process, while the Xeon E5-2623 v3 uses a larger 22 nm process.

Q: Which CPU has integrated graphics?

A: Only the i7-5700HQ has integrated graphics (Intel HD 5600). The Xeon E5-2623 v3 has no integrated GPU.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i7-5700HQ | Intel Xeon E5-2623 v3 |

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

| Base Clock | 2.70 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

| TDP | 47 W | 105 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1364 | Intel Socket 2011-3 |

| Architecture | Broadwell | Haswell |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 22 nm |

| Die Size | 182 mm² | 356 mm² |

| Transistors | Not specified | 2,600 million |

| L3 Cache | 6 MB (shared) | 10 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR3 | DDR4 |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Quad-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 29.9 GB/s | 59.7 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 16 Lanes | Gen 3, 40 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 5600 | None |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

| Launch MSRP | $378 | $444 |

| Part Number | SR2BP | SR208 |

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon E5-2623 v3 outperforms the Intel Core i7-5700HQ in every single head-to-head benchmark. The Xeon's wins range from 7.6% to 8.6% across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, covering both single-core and multi-core tests. If you need the fastest possible compute from these two specific chips, the Xeon is the only choice. Its 10 MB L3 cache, higher 3.00 GHz base clock, quad-channel DDR4, and 59.7 GB/s memory bandwidth all contribute to its lead. For a server or workstation where ECC memory and 40 PCIe lanes are required, the Xeon is not just faster—it is the only viable option.

However, the i7-5700HQ is not without merit. It delivers 80-90% of the Xeon's performance while consuming less than half the power (47 W versus 105 W). Its integrated HD 5600 graphics and BGA 1364 socket make it suitable for compact, low-power systems where the Xeon's socket and power requirements are impractical. If you are building a small form factor PC or a laptop replacement and do not need ECC or massive memory bandwidth, the i7 offers a compelling efficiency story. But for raw performance, the Xeon E5-2623 v3 is the clear winner according to the benchmark data. The i7's 40th percentile versus the Xeon's 39th percentile shows they are near the bottom of current CPU performance charts, but within this pairing, the Xeon takes the crown.