Intel Core i7-7740X vs Intel Xeon E5-2640 v3 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database records a clean sweep for the Intel Xeon E5-2640 v3 across all six Cinebench comparisons. The Xeon wins every multi-core and single-core test, with a consistent performance advantage ranging from 12.8% to 13.4% over the Intel Core i7-7740X.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 942 against 831 for the Core i7, a 13.4% lead. The single-core R15 test shows the Xeon at 132 versus 117, a 12.8% advantage. These early results establish the pattern: the Xeon's edge is present in every workload category, not just heavily threaded tasks.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the Xeon posts 3926 multi-core and 553 single-core, compared to 3465 and 488 for the Core i7. Both deltas sit at 13.3%. The margin is nearly identical across R15 and R20, suggesting the performance relationship is stable regardless of the rendering engine version.

Cinebench R23 repeats the same story. The Xeon reaches 9348 multi-core and 1319 single-core, while the Core i7 manages 8250 and 1164. Again, the delta is 13.3% in both tests. The database shows six wins for the Xeon and zero for the Core i7 in these head-to-head runs.

The average benchmark score in the database tells a slightly different overall picture. The Xeon averages 2703 across all recorded tests, while the Core i7 averages 2648. That difference is only about 2.1%, much smaller than the Cinebench deltas. The Core i7 also has two additional Geekbench results in its record, which pull its average toward the Xeon's level. Those Geekbench scores are 5246 multi-core and 1619 single-core, and they are not part of the head-to-head comparison set.

Neither processor stands out in the broader market. Both sit at the 50th percentile among all CPUs in the database. The Xeon's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-1185G7E at a 0% delta, the Core i7-8700T at 0.1%, the Core i5-1345UE at 0.2%, and the Xeon E-2226G at -0.2%. The Core i7-7740X's nearest rivals are the Xeon E-2274G at 0.2%, the Core i7-5820K at 0.2%, the Core i9-8950HK at 0.3%, and the Core i7-1195G7 at 0.4%. Both chips are firmly mid-pack in the overall standings.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core Cinebench tests?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2640 v3 wins all three multi-core Cinebench tests. It scores 942 in R15, 3926 in R20, and 9348 in R23, versus 831, 3465, and 8250 for the Core i7-7740X. The margin is 13.3% to 13.4% in each case.

Q: Does the Core i7-7740X win any benchmark at all?

A: The recorded head-to-head data shows no wins for the Core i7-7740X. The Xeon wins all six Cinebench comparisons. The Core i7 does have Geekbench scores in its database record, but those tests are not part of the head-to-head set.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Xeon E5-2640 v3 averages 2703 across all its recorded benchmarks. The Core i7-7740X averages 2648. That is a 2.1% difference, much smaller than the Cinebench deltas because the Core i7's Geekbench results are included in its average but not in the Xeon's record.

Q: What is the performance gap in single-core tests?

A: The Xeon leads by 12.8% in Cinebench R15 single-core, scoring 132 versus 117. In R20 and R23 single-core, the lead is 13.3%, with scores of 553 versus 488 and 1319 versus 1164 respectively.

Q: How do these chips rank against all other CPUs?

A: Both processors sit at the 50th percentile in the database. The Xeon's closest rival is the Core i7-1185G7E with a 0% delta, while the Core i7-7740X's closest rival is the Xeon E-2274G with a 0.2% delta.

Q: Does the Core i7 have any advantage in memory bandwidth?

A: The database does not record a memory bandwidth figure for the Core i7-7740X. The Xeon E5-2640 v3 lists a quad-channel DDR4 bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core i7 also supports quad-channel DDR4, but no bandwidth number is available for it.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and serve different market segments. The Xeon E5-2640 v3 is built on the Haswell-EP architecture with a 22 nm process node. It is a server and workstation part designed for sustained multi-threaded workloads. The Core i7-7740X uses the Kaby Lake architecture on a 14 nm process node, and it is a desktop part aimed at single-threaded responsiveness and overclocking.

The Xeon contains 8 cores and 16 threads. The Core i7 contains 4 cores and 8 threads. That doubling of cores and threads is the primary structural reason for the Xeon's multi-core advantage, though the Core i7's higher clock speeds partially compensate. The Xeon's base clock is 2.60 GHz with a boost of 3.40 GHz. The Core i7 runs at 4.30 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost, roughly 1.7 GHz and 1.2 GHz higher respectively.

Cache configurations differ substantially. Both chips have 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core. The shared L3 cache is where they diverge: the Xeon offers 20 MB shared, while the Core i7 has only 8 MB shared. That 12 MB difference gives the Xeon more room for frequently accessed data across its eight cores.

The process node difference is notable. The Xeon uses Intel's 22 nm process with a die size of 356 mm² and 2,600 million transistors. The Core i7 uses 14 nm, but the database records no transistor count or die size for it. The newer process node gives the Core i7 a denser, more efficient transistor layout, which helps explain its high clock speeds despite fewer cores.

Memory support is similar in channel count but not in details. Both support quad-channel DDR4. The Xeon records 59.7 GB/s of memory bandwidth and supports ECC memory. The Core i7 does not support ECC and has no bandwidth figure recorded. For a workstation or server running long computations with error checking, ECC support is a meaningful architectural differentiator.

PCI Express support also differs. The Xeon provides PCIe Gen 3 with 40 lanes from the CPU only. The Core i7 also supports PCIe Gen 3, but the database does not list a lane count. The Xeon's 40 lanes are substantial for multi-GPU or high-density storage configurations.

The Xeon is marked as end-of-life production status, while the Core i7 is listed as active. The Xeon's release date is September 2014, and the Core i7's is June 2017, a gap of roughly three years. The multiplier is locked on the Xeon and unlocked on the Core i7, which matters for overclocking-oriented builders.

Specification Differences

The core count is the clearest difference: 8 cores and 16 threads for the Xeon, versus 4 cores and 8 threads for the Core i7. Clock speeds are also far apart. The Xeon runs at 2.60 GHz base and 3.40 GHz boost. The Core i7 runs at 4.30 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost.

Thermal design power differs as well. The Xeon is rated at 90 watts TDP, while the Core i7 is rated at 112 watts. Despite having half the cores, the Core i7 draws more power due to its much higher clock speeds. The Xeon's lower TDP is notable for dense server installations where thermal headroom is limited.

The sockets are incompatible. The Xeon uses Intel Socket 2011-3, while the Core i7 uses Intel Socket 2066. Anyone upgrading between these parts must change motherboards, and the platform differences extend beyond the socket itself.

The L3 cache is a significant difference, with 20 MB on the Xeon versus 8 MB on the Core i7. Both share the same L1 and L2 sizes per core. Memory bandwidth is recorded only for the Xeon at 59.7 GB/s. ECC support is present on the Xeon and absent on the Core i7.

The process node differs, with 22 nm for the Xeon and 14 nm for the Core i7. Transistor count and die size are recorded only for the Xeon: 2,600 million transistors on a 356 mm² die. The market segment also differs, with the Xeon targeting server and workstation roles and the Core i7 targeting desktop use.

The Xeon has a recorded launch MSRP of $939. The Core i7's launch MSRP is not recorded in the database. The Xeon's multiplier is locked, while the Core i7's multiplier is unlocked for overclocking. The Xeon has a part number of SR205, and the Core i7's part number is not listed.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon E5-2640 v3 wins every recorded Cinebench test, both multi-core and single-core. The multi-core wins are easy to explain: it has double the cores and threads, plus 12 MB more L3 cache. In Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core, it beats the Core i7 by 13.3% to 13.4%. For rendering, video encoding, compilation, and other parallel workloads, the Xeon is the clear choice.

The single-core wins are more surprising because the Core i7 has much higher clocks. The Xeon's 12.8% to 13.3% lead in single-core Cinebench tests suggests that memory bandwidth, cache hierarchy, or other architectural factors matter more than raw clock speed in these specific workloads. The Xeon's quad-channel memory with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth may help feed the cores more efficiently, even in single-threaded rendering tasks.

The Xeon also wins on platform features that matter for professional use. ECC memory support is critical for data integrity in long-running server workloads. The 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes provide ample connectivity for GPUs, NVMe drives, and network cards. The 90 watt TDP makes it easier to cool in dense chassis compared to the Core i7's 112 watts.

The Core i7-7740X has no recorded benchmark wins in the head-to-head set. Its advantages are structural rather than measured. It has a much higher base clock of 4.30 GHz and boost clock of 4.60 GHz, which matters for lightly threaded games and applications that respond to clock speed. Its unlocked multiplier allows overclocking, which the database does not quantify but which can push performance beyond stock. The 14 nm process node is newer, and the active production status means it remains available for purchase.

For gaming, the Core i7's high clocks and unlocked multiplier are attractive, though the database does not include gaming benchmarks to confirm an advantage. For desktop responsiveness and tasks that use one or two threads, the Core i7's clock speed advantage should translate to better feel, even if Cinebench single-core does not reflect it.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous in favor of the Intel Xeon E5-2640 v3 for every recorded Cinebench workload. It wins all six head-to-head tests with margins between 12.8% and 13.4%. The Xeon's 8 cores and 16 threads, combined with 20 MB of L3 cache and quad-channel DDR4 memory at 59.7 GB/s, produce a consistently faster result in rendering tasks.

The Xeon is the right pick for anyone running multi-threaded professional workloads: video rendering, 3D rendering, scientific computation, or virtualization. Its ECC memory support and 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes reinforce its server and workstation positioning. The 90 watt TDP is modest for the performance delivered, and the launch MSRP of $939 reflects its original enterprise positioning.

The Core i7-7740X is the pick for builders who prioritize clock speed and overclocking headroom. Its 4.30 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost clocks are far higher than the Xeon's 2.60 GHz and 3.40 GHz. The unlocked multiplier is a clear benefit for enthusiasts. The 14 nm process node is newer, and the active production status means it is still on the market.

However, the database shows no measured performance win for the Core i7 in the recorded tests. Its average benchmark score of 2648 trails the Xeon's 2703. The Core i7's single-core Cinebench scores are lower than the Xeon's despite much higher clocks, which suggests the Xeon's memory architecture provides an advantage even in lightly threaded rendering.

Choose the Xeon if you need maximum throughput in Cinebench-style workloads and value ECC memory and PCIe lane count. Choose the Core i7 if you want a desktop part with high clock speeds, an unlocked multiplier for overclocking, and a newer process node. The data favors the Xeon in every measured comparison, but the Core i7's design goals are different: raw clock speed and flexibility rather than raw multi-threaded output.