Intel Core i7-7920HQ vs Intel Xeon E3-1245 v5 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data paints an unusually lopsided picture. Across every single recorded test, the Intel Xeon E3-1245 v5 takes the win. There are zero wins for the Intel Core i7-7920HQ in the head-to-head comparisons. This is not a case of one chip edging ahead in specific workloads; the Xeon dominates uniformly across all six Cinebench tests, covering both single-core and multi-core scenarios.

The Core i7-7920HQ does not win anywhere in the recorded data. Its only statistical advantage appears in the average benchmark score, where it reaches 1992 against the Xeon's 1973, a difference of roughly 1%. That average, however, is influenced by the Geekbench results that the Xeon lacks in the head-to-head set. The i7 lists Geekbench multicore at 3999 and singlecore at 1267, while the Xeon's benchmark list omits Geekbench entirely. So the i7's aggregate score benefits from those additional data points, but in direct Cinebench comparisons, it trails consistently.

The Xeon E3-1245 v5 wins on raw compute in every measured category. Its Cinebench R15 multicore score of 687 beats the i7's 619, a 9.9% gap. Single-core R15 shows 96 versus 87, a 9.4% lead. The pattern repeats in R20 and R23, with the Xeon holding roughly a 9.8% to 9.9% advantage across all tests. This suggests the Xeon's higher base clock of 3.50 GHz versus 3.10 GHz, combined with its desktop-oriented Skylake architecture, delivers consistent performance gains regardless of workload type.

For users, the implication is straightforward: if the workload is Cinebench-style rendering, the Xeon is the clear choice. The i7-7920HQ, despite its mobile Kaby Lake-H design and higher boost clock of 4.10 GHz versus 3.90 GHz, cannot overcome the Xeon's per-clock efficiency and higher sustained clock rates. The data also reveals both processors sit at the 44th percentile among all CPUs, meaning they are closely matched in overall standing, but the Xeon edges ahead in every direct comparison.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i7-7920HQ has an average benchmark score of 1992, while the Intel Xeon E3-1245 v5 scores 1973. The i7 leads by 19 points, roughly 1%.

Q: How large is the Xeon's lead in multi-core Cinebench tests?

A: Across all three multi-core tests (R15, R20, R23), the Xeon leads by 9.8% to 9.9%. For example, Cinebench R23 multicore shows the Xeon at 6822 versus the i7 at 6151.

Q: Does the Core i7-7920HQ win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. The head-to-head data records 6 wins for the Xeon E3-1245 v5 and 0 wins for the i7-7920HQ across all Cinebench tests.

Q: What are the clock speed differences between the two chips?

A: The i7-7920HQ has a base clock of 3.10 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. The Xeon E3-1245 v5 has a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz. The Xeon runs faster at base, while the i7 boosts higher.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: Yes, both support DDR3 and DDR4 memory in dual-channel configuration. The Xeon additionally lists a memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s, while the i7 does not have a listed bandwidth figure.

Q: Which chip supports ECC memory?

A: Only the Intel Xeon E3-1245 v5 supports ECC memory. The Core i7-7920HQ does not.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result is the uniformity of the Xeon's victories. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Xeon scores 687 against the i7's 619, a delta of -9.9% for the i7. Single-core R15 shows a similar story: 96 for the Xeon, 87 for the i7, a 9.4% gap. These are not marginal differences; they represent a consistent performance tier separation.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the Xeon's multicore score is 2865 versus the i7's 2583, again a 9.8% deficit. Single-core R20 shows 404 against 364, a 9.9% gap. The pattern holds exactly in R23: multicore 6822 versus 6151 (9.8% behind), and single-core 963 versus 868 (9.9% behind). Every delta falls between 9.4% and 9.9%, which implies the performance differential is systemic rather than workload-specific.

The i7's highest single-core score in any test is 868 in R23, while the Xeon reaches 963 in the same test. That 95-point gap in R23 single-core is larger than the i7's total score in R15 single-core (87). In other words, the Xeon's single-core advantage in R23 is greater than the i7's entire R15 single-core result. This highlights how the Xeon's architectural efficiency, despite a lower boost clock, translates into meaningful per-thread performance.

What explains the i7's consistent deficit? The i7 has a higher boost clock (4.10 GHz versus 3.90 GHz) and a newer Kaby Lake architecture, yet it still loses every test. The Xeon's higher base clock (3.50 GHz) and desktop-grade power envelope of 80W versus 45W likely allow it to sustain higher clocks under load. The i7's mobile design, even with a 4.10 GHz boost, may throttle or operate at lower sustained frequencies during prolonged rendering, which these Cinebench tests simulate.

The Geekbench scores, which only exist for the i7, show 3999 multicore and 1267 singlecore. Without comparable Xeon data, those cannot be directly compared. But the Cinebench results are unambiguous: the Xeon wins every single test by roughly 10%, and that margin is remarkably consistent across three generations of the Cinebench suite.

Specification Differences

The two processors diverge most clearly in their physical and platform specifications. The i7-7920HQ uses the Intel BGA 1440 socket, a mobile package, while the Xeon E3-1245 v5 uses Intel Socket 1151, a desktop platform. This alone dictates their deployment scenarios: the i7 is soldered into laptops, the Xeon drops into desktop motherboards.

Thermal design power differs substantially. The i7 is rated at 45W, typical for a mobile chip, while the Xeon is rated at 80W, reflecting its desktop orientation. That 35W difference explains the Xeon's ability to maintain higher base clocks (3.50 GHz versus 3.10 GHz) despite the i7's higher boost clock (4.10 GHz versus 3.90 GHz).

Process node and die size are nearly identical: both use Intel's 14 nm process. The i7 has a die size of 126 mm², while the Xeon is slightly smaller at 122 mm². The Xeon lists a transistor count of 1,750 million, while the i7 does not provide one. Cache configurations match exactly: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3.

Memory support is the same in type (DDR3, DDR4) and channel configuration (dual-channel), but the Xeon adds ECC memory support, a critical feature for server and workstation reliability. The Xeon also documents a memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s, which the i7 does not specify.

Integrated graphics differ: the i7 includes Intel HD Graphics 630, while the Xeon includes HD Graphics P530. The Xeon's P530 is aimed at professional workloads, though the data does not include comparative graphics benchmarks. PCIe support is identical: Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU.

Release timing also separates them. The i7 launched in January 2017 with a launch MSRP of $568. The Xeon launched in October 2015 with a launch MSRP of $294. Both are now end-of-life, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

Architecturally, these chips represent two different Intel generations and design philosophies. The i7-7920HQ is built on Kaby Lake, specifically the Kaby Lake-H variant, which is Intel's mobile-optimized architecture. The Xeon E3-1245 v5 uses Skylake, specifically Skylake-DT, a desktop architecture. Both are 14 nm parts, but Kaby Lake is a refinement of Skylake, typically offering slightly better clock scaling and power efficiency.

The i7 belongs to the Core i7 generation (Kaby Lake-H), while the Xeon belongs to the Xeon E3 generation (Skylake-DT). This distinction matters beyond branding: the Xeon's Skylake-DT design targets sustained server workloads, with ECC support and a higher TDP envelope. The i7's Kaby Lake-H targets mobile performance with power efficiency as a priority.

Cache hierarchies are identical in structure and size: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3. Both have 4 cores and 8 threads. The transistor count for the Xeon is listed as 1,750 million, while the i7 does not disclose a figure. Die sizes are nearly the same (126 mm² versus 122 mm²), suggesting similar transistor densities.

The integrated graphics differ by architecture. The i7 uses HD Graphics 630, which is part of the Kaby Lake generation. The Xeon uses HD Graphics P530, a Skylake-era GPU. The P530 is positioned for professional graphics use, while the 630 is a mainstream mobile GPU. Neither chip's graphics performance is benchmarked in the data, so no numerical comparison is possible.

The memory controller in the Xeon supports ECC, which typically requires a server chipset and registered memory modules. The i7's lack of ECC support aligns with its mobile consumer positioning. Both support DDR3 and DDR4, which gives system builders flexibility, but the Xeon's ECC capability is the key architectural differentiator for reliability-focused workloads.

The Verdict

The data points to a single conclusion: the Intel Xeon E3-1245 v5 is the superior processor for raw compute performance. It wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, with margins between 9.4% and 9.9%. The i7-7920HQ does not win a single recorded benchmark, despite having a higher boost clock and a newer architecture.

A buyer prioritizing multi-threaded rendering should choose the Xeon without hesitation. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 6822 versus 6151 represents a 10% performance advantage, which compounds over long render times. The Xeon's single-core advantage is equally consistent, making it better for lightly threaded tasks as well.

However, the i7-7920HQ is not without merit. Its 45W TDP makes it suitable for mobile platforms, whereas the Xeon's 80W TDP requires a desktop chassis with adequate cooling. The i7's BGA 1440 socket means it is soldered into laptops, offering a complete mobile solution. The Xeon's Socket 1151 allows for desktop builds with upgradeable motherboards.

The i7's higher average benchmark score (1992 versus 1973) is a statistical artifact of including Geekbench data, not evidence of superior performance. In every direct Cinebench comparison, the i7 trails by roughly 10%. The i7 also lacks ECC memory support, which may disqualify it for critical workloads.

Users needing ECC memory, sustained desktop performance, or server-grade reliability should pick the Xeon E3-1245 v5. Users constrained to a mobile form factor, or who specifically need the i7's integrated HD Graphics 630, would choose the i7-7920HQ. But for pure compute, the Xeon is the clear winner in every recorded test, and the data offers no scenario where the i7 outperforms it.