Intel Core i7-7820HQ vs Intel Xeon E3-1230 v5 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E3-1230 v5 and the Intel Core i7-7820HQ are both 4-core, 8-thread processors built on Intel’s 14 nm process, but they target very different markets. The Xeon is a socketed server/workstation part with ECC memory support, while the i7 is a soldered mobile chip with integrated graphics. Benchmark data shows a consistent performance gap, with the Xeon winning all six head-to-head Cinebench tests by roughly 10% in each case. However, the i7’s lower power envelope and integrated GPU make it the more versatile choice for compact, battery-powered systems.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon E3-1230 v5 wins decisively in raw compute performance across every benchmark recorded. In Cinebench R15 multicore, it scores 678 against the i7-7820HQ’s 613, a 10.6% advantage. That margin holds steady across newer workloads: Cinebench R20 multicore shows 2827 versus 2555 (10.6% delta), and Cinebench R23 multicore shows 6733 versus 6084 (10.7% delta). Single-core performance follows the same pattern, with the Xeon leading by 10.5% in R15 (95 vs 86), 10.8% in R20 (399 vs 360), and 10.7% in R23 (950 vs 858). For any task that stresses the CPU—rendering, compiling, or scientific computation—the Xeon is the clear winner.

The Intel Core i7-7820HQ, by contrast, wins on platform flexibility. It includes Intel HD Graphics 630, while the Xeon has no integrated graphics at all. That means the i7 can power a display without a discrete GPU, making it suitable for laptops or all-in-one systems. The i7 also carries a much lower TDP of 45 watts versus the Xeon’s 80 watts, which translates to less heat and longer battery life in mobile designs. Its socket is Intel BGA 1440, a soldered package meant for compact motherboards, whereas the Xeon uses the socketed Intel Socket 1151, which allows for upgrades or replacements. The i7’s launch MSRP is $378, compared to the Xeon’s $261, but that price difference reflects the mobile engineering, not performance superiority.

Benchmark data also shows the i7 has a Geekbench multicore score of 3748 and a single-core score of 1215, tests that the Xeon does not have recorded. While not directly comparable, these numbers place the i7 in a similar overall percentile band (43rd vs the Xeon’s 44th), indicating that both chips are near the middle of the performance distribution across all CPUs. The i7’s average benchmark score is 1940, just 7 points below the Xeon’s 1947, a negligible 0.4% difference.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations. The Xeon E3-1230 v5 uses the Skylake architecture (codename Skylake-DT) and was released in October 2015, targeting the server/workstation segment. The Core i7-7820HQ uses the Kaby Lake architecture (codename Kaby Lake-H), released in January 2017, designed for high-end mobile systems. Both are built on the same 14 nm process at Intel’s foundry, but the die sizes differ slightly: the Xeon measures 122 mm² with 1,750 million transistors, while the i7 measures 126 mm² with no transistor count listed in the data.

Cache configurations are identical on paper. Both have 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is also the same: both accept DDR3 and DDR4 in dual-channel mode. The Xeon’s memory bandwidth is listed at 34.1 GB/s, while the i7’s is not specified in the data. A key differentiator is ECC memory: the Xeon supports it, the i7 does not. That makes the Xeon suitable for error-sensitive workloads like databases or financial calculations, while the i7 relies on conventional non-ECC memory.

Clock speeds tell a nuanced story. The Xeon has a higher base clock at 3.40 GHz versus the i7’s 2.90 GHz, but the i7 has a higher boost clock at 3.90 GHz versus the Xeon’s 3.80 GHz. This suggests the Xeon sustains higher performance under continuous load, while the i7 can burst slightly higher when thermals allow. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is off the table for both. The Xeon’s PCIe setup is Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), and the i7 matches that exactly. The i7’s integrated graphics is the only major feature the Xeon lacks, and the Xeon’s ECC support is the only major feature the i7 lacks.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are unambiguous: the Xeon wins all six recorded comparisons, and the margins are remarkably consistent. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Xeon scores 678 against the i7’s 613, a 10.6% lead. Single-core R15 shows 95 versus 86, a 10.5% lead. Moving to Cinebench R20, the Xeon’s multicore score is 2827 versus 2555, again a 10.6% delta, and single-core is 399 versus 360, a 10.8% lead. The newest tests, Cinebench R23, show the Xeon at 6733 multicore against the i7’s 6084 (10.7% delta) and 950 single-core against 858 (10.7% delta).

These consistent percentages suggest the performance gap is architectural, not workload-specific. The Xeon’s higher base clock (3.40 vs 2.90 GHz) likely explains much of the sustained multicore advantage, since both chips share the same core count, thread count, and cache sizes. The i7’s higher boost clock (3.90 vs 3.80 GHz) does not translate into a single-core win, as the Xeon still leads by over 10% in every single-core test. That indicates the Xeon’s Skylake core design may be more efficient at clock-for-clock execution than the i7’s Kaby Lake mobile variant, despite the latter being a newer generation.

Looking at the nearest rivals puts these numbers in context. The Xeon’s average benchmark score of 1947 is nearly identical to the Intel Core i5-1035G7 (1948, delta -0.1%), the Intel Xeon E3-1535M v5 (1945, delta 0.1%), the Intel Core i7-8709G (1950, delta -0.2%), and the Intel Core i7-9850HL (1941, delta 0.3%). The i7-7820HQ’s average of 1940 is similarly clustered, with its closest rival being the i7-9850HL (1941, delta -0.1%). Both chips sit within a tight performance envelope around the 1940-1950 mark, meaning that while the Xeon beats the i7 by 10% in Cinebench, neither chip is far from a broader pack of mid-range CPUs from later generations.

The Verdict

Choose the Intel Xeon E3-1230 v5 if your priority is raw compute performance and you have room for a discrete GPU. The data shows it leads the i7-7820HQ by 10.6% to 10.8% across all Cinebench versions, which is a meaningful margin for rendering or batch workloads. Its ECC memory support and higher base clock make it suited for workstation tasks where data integrity and sustained throughput matter more than power efficiency. The socketed design also means you can pair it with a standard ATX or microATX motherboard, and its $261 launch MSRP is lower than the i7’s $378, though you will need to budget for a separate graphics solution.

Choose the Intel Core i7-7820HQ if you need an all-in-one mobile processor. Its integrated Intel HD Graphics 630 eliminates the need for a discrete GPU, and its 45-watt TDP is nearly half the Xeon’s 80 watts, making it viable for laptops and compact systems where cooling and battery life are critical. The i7’s performance, while 10% behind the Xeon in Cinebench, is still competitive: its Geekbench multicore score of 3748 and single-core score of 1215, plus its 43rd percentile ranking, show it is a capable processor for everyday tasks and moderate creative work. The trade-off is clear: you sacrifice about 10% performance and ECC support, but gain integrated graphics and a mobile-friendly power profile.

For a desktop workstation, the Xeon is the data-backed winner. For a mobile workstation or thin-and-light laptop, the i7 is the only practical choice, since the Xeon’s socket and power requirements are not suited for portable designs. The 0.4% difference in average benchmark scores (1947 vs 1940) confirms that both chips are in the same performance class, but the Xeon’s consistent 10% lead in every Cinebench test gives it the edge whenever the CPU is the bottleneck.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1230 v5 wins all three multi-core tests: Cinebench R15 (678 vs 613), R20 (2827 vs 2555), and R23 (6733 vs 6084), with deltas of 10.6% to 10.7%.

Q: Does the Intel Core i7-7820HQ have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it includes Intel HD Graphics 630. The Intel Xeon E3-1230 v5 has no integrated graphics, so it requires a discrete GPU for display output.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Intel Xeon E3-1230 v5 supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core i7-7820HQ does not.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for these two chips?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1230 v5 has a TDP of 80 watts, while the Intel Core i7-7820HQ has a TDP of 45 watts.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Xeon E3-1230 v5 has an average benchmark score of 1947, and the i7-7820HQ has an average of 1940, a difference of 0.4%. The Xeon’s nearest rival is the Intel Core i5-1035G7 (1948, delta -0.1%), while the i7’s nearest rival is the Intel Core i7-9850HL (1941, delta -0.1%).

Q: Which chip has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i7-7820HQ has a boost clock of 3.90 GHz, which is higher than the Intel Xeon E3-1230 v5’s boost clock of 3.80 GHz. However, the Xeon still wins all single-core Cinebench tests, scoring 95 vs 86 in R15, 399 vs 360 in R20, and 950 vs 858 in R23.