Intel Core i7-6700T vs Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 Comparison

The Intel Core i7-6700T and the Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 are both end-of-life Intel processors, yet they target very different segments of the market. The i7-6700T is a low-power desktop part, while the Xeon E5-2620 v3 is a server/workstation chip. Benchmark results show a remarkably consistent performance gap across all tested workloads, with the Xeon E5-2620 v3 winning all six head-to-head comparisons. The data shows a decisive, though not overwhelming, victory for the six-core Xeon.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Xeon E5-2620 v3 leads in every single benchmark recorded, but the margins are surprisingly uniform. In the Cinebench R15 suite, the Xeon scores 664 points in the multi-core test against the i7-6700T’s 599 points, a delta of -9.8% from the perspective of the i7-6700T. The single-core R15 test tells a similar story: the Xeon’s 93 points edge out the i7-6700T’s 84 points, a -9.7% difference.

Moving to the Cinebench R20 suite, the pattern holds. The Xeon E5-2620 v3 posts a multi-core score of 2769, while the i7-6700T trails at 2496, a -9.9% gap. In single-core R20, the Xeon’s 391 points beat the i7-6700T’s 352 points by exactly 10%. The newest test, Cinebench R23, reinforces this trend: the Xeon achieves 6595 multi-core and 931 single-core, while the i7-6700T manages 5943 and 839 respectively. Both R23 deltas sit at -9.9%.

The consistency is striking. Across six tests, the performance deficit for the i7-6700T ranges from -9.7% to -10.0%. This suggests the difference is not workload-dependent but rather a fundamental throughput advantage for the Xeon. The Xeon’s lead is narrower than its core count advantage might imply — it has 50% more cores (6 vs 4) and 50% more threads (12 vs 8) — yet it only delivers roughly 10% more performance in these render workloads.

Interestingly, the overall average benchmark scores tell a different story. The i7-6700T has an average benchmark score of 1918, while the Xeon E5-2620 v3 sits at 1907. Both processors land at the 43rd percentile among all CPUs. This means that while the Xeon wins every Cinebench test, the i7-6700T holds its own in other benchmark categories not detailed here, effectively pulling its average up to parity. The nearest rivals for the i7-6700T include the AMD Ryzen 3 7320U at 1916 (0.1% delta) and the Intel Core i3-10305T at 1922 (-0.2% delta). The Xeon’s nearest rival is the Intel Xeon E3-1285 v4 at 1908 (0% delta). Both processors are clustered tightly with mid-range competitors, indicating they occupy a similar performance tier despite their architectural differences.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different architectural generations and process nodes. The Intel Core i7-6700T is built on the 14 nm Skylake architecture, while the Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 uses the older 22 nm Haswell-EP design. This generational gap gives the i7-6700T a density and efficiency advantage, though the Xeon compensates with a larger physical footprint. The Xeon has a die size of 356 mm² and contains 2,600 million transistors; the i7-6700T’s die size and transistor count are not listed in the data.

Core and thread counts differ significantly. The i7-6700T offers 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Xeon E5-2620 v3 provides 6 cores and 12 threads. Clock speeds favor the i7-6700T: it has a base clock of 2.80 GHz and a boost clock of 3.60 GHz, compared to the Xeon’s 2.40 GHz base and 3.20 GHz boost. Despite the Xeon’s lower clocks, its extra cores allow it to win multi-threaded tests. The single-core tests also go to the Xeon, which is notable given the i7-6700T’s higher boost clock; this suggests the Haswell-EP architecture has a per-clock IPC advantage in this specific workload, or the i7-6700T’s 35W TDP limits its sustained single-core performance.

Cache configurations diverge sharply. Both chips have 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, but the L3 cache is very different. The i7-6700T has 8 MB of shared L3, while the Xeon E5-2620 v3 offers 15 MB of shared L3. The Xeon’s nearly double L3 cache likely helps in data-heavy server workloads, though the benchmark data shows only a modest overall performance advantage.

Memory support is a major differentiator. The i7-6700T supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration, providing 34.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The Xeon E5-2620 v3 supports only DDR4 but does so in a quad-channel layout, achieving 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth — a 75% increase. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, while the i7-6700T does not. PCIe lane counts also favor the Xeon: it provides 40 Gen 3 lanes (CPU only) versus the i7-6700T’s 16 Gen 3 lanes. The i7-6700T includes integrated HD Graphics 530, while the Xeon has no integrated graphics. The i7-6700T uses the Intel Socket 1151, while the Xeon requires Intel Socket 2011-3.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 wins with a score of 6595, compared to the Intel Core i7-6700T’s 5943, a -9.9% delta.

Q: Does the Intel Core i7-6700T have a higher boost clock than the Xeon?

A: Yes. The i7-6700T boosts to 3.60 GHz, while the Xeon E5-2620 v3 boosts to 3.20 GHz. Despite this, the Xeon still wins all single-core benchmark tests.

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

A: The Xeon E5-2620 v3 provides 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth via quad-channel DDR4, while the i7-6700T provides 34.1 GB/s via dual-channel DDR3/DDR4.

Q: Does the Intel Core i7-6700T support ECC memory?

A: No. ECC memory support is exclusive to the Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The i7-6700T has an average benchmark score of 1918, while the Xeon E5-2620 v3 has 1907. Both sit at the 43rd percentile of all CPUs.

Q: Which chip has more PCIe lanes?

A: The Xeon E5-2620 v3 offers 40 Gen 3 lanes (CPU only), while the i7-6700T offers 16 Gen 3 lanes (CPU only).

Specification Differences

• Cores: 4 (i7-6700T) vs 6 (Xeon E5-2620 v3)
• Threads: 8 (i7-6700T) vs 12 (Xeon E5-2620 v3)
• Base Clock: 2.80 GHz (i7-6700T) vs 2.40 GHz (Xeon E5-2620 v3)
• Boost Clock: 3.60 GHz (i7-6700T) vs 3.20 GHz (Xeon E5-2620 v3)
• TDP: 35W (i7-6700T) vs 85W (Xeon E5-2620 v3)
• Socket: Intel Socket 1151 (i7-6700T) vs Intel Socket 2011-3 (Xeon E5-2620 v3)
• Architecture: Skylake (i7-6700T) vs Haswell (Xeon E5-2620 v3)
• Process Node: 14 nm (i7-6700T) vs 22 nm (Xeon E5-2620 v3)
• Transistors: N/A (i7-6700T) vs 2,600 million (Xeon E5-2620 v3)
• Die Size: N/A (i7-6700T) vs 356 mm² (Xeon E5-2620 v3)
• L3 Cache: 8 MB (i7-6700T) vs 15 MB (Xeon E5-2620 v3)
• Memory Support: DDR3, DDR4 (i7-6700T) vs DDR4 (Xeon E5-2620 v3)
• Memory Bus: Dual-channel (i7-6700T) vs Quad-channel (Xeon E5-2620 v3)
• Memory Bandwidth: 34.1 GB/s (i7-6700T) vs 59.7 GB/s (Xeon E5-2620 v3)
• ECC Memory: No (i7-6700T) vs Yes (Xeon E5-2620 v3)
• PCIe Lanes: 16 (i7-6700T) vs 40 (Xeon E5-2620 v3)
• Integrated Graphics: HD Graphics 530 (i7-6700T) vs None (Xeon E5-2620 v3)
• Market Segment: Desktop (i7-6700T) vs Server/Workstation (Xeon E5-2620 v3)
• Release Date: 2015-08-31 (i7-6700T) vs 2014-09-07 (Xeon E5-2620 v3)

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 wins every recorded benchmark, making it the clear performance leader across all Cinebench iterations, both single-core and multi-core. Its advantages are most pronounced in multi-threaded render workloads, where its 6 cores and 12 threads outpace the i7-6700T’s 4 cores and 8 threads. The Xeon also wins decisively on platform features: quad-channel memory with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth, ECC memory support, and 40 PCIe lanes. These features make it well-suited for memory-intensive workstation tasks, server virtualization, and applications requiring data integrity.

The Intel Core i7-6700T has only one clear advantage in the data: power efficiency. Its 35W TDP is less than half of the Xeon’s 85W TDP. This makes the i7-6700T a better fit for compact, low-power desktop builds where thermal output is a priority. The i7-6700T also includes integrated HD Graphics 530, eliminating the need for a discrete GPU in basic systems. While it loses all six benchmark tests, its average benchmark score of 1918 actually edges out the Xeon’s 1907, suggesting that in non-Cinebench workloads, the i7-6700T may be competitive or even superior. The i7-6700T’s higher base and boost clocks also give it an edge in clock-sensitive applications, even though the Cinebench data does not reflect this.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear choice based on workload and platform requirements. The Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 is the superior performer in every benchmark test recorded, with a consistent 9.7% to 10% lead over the i7-6700T. It offers more cores, more threads, double the L3 cache, quad-channel memory, ECC support, and significantly more PCIe lanes. For users building a workstation or server where multi-threaded render performance and platform expandability are critical, the Xeon E5-2620 v3 is the unequivocal choice. Its higher 85W TDP and lack of integrated graphics are acceptable trade-offs in a system designed for sustained compute.

The Intel Core i7-6700T, despite losing all head-to-head benchmarks, is not without merit. Its 35W TDP makes it a compelling option for energy-conscious desktop builds or small-form-factor systems where heat dissipation is a challenge. The inclusion of HD Graphics 530 means it can operate without a discrete GPU, and its higher clock speeds may benefit lightly threaded applications not represented in the Cinebench suite. Its average benchmark score is marginally higher than the Xeon’s, indicating that its overall performance profile is more balanced. For a general-purpose desktop that prioritizes low power consumption and integrated graphics, the i7-6700T is the more practical option. The verdict is straightforward: pick the Xeon for maximum compute throughput and server-class features; pick the i7-6700T for a low-power desktop with integrated graphics.