Intel Core i7-8560U vs Intel Xeon E5-2623 v3 Comparison

The Intel Core i7-8560U and the Intel Xeon E5-2623 v3 are two processors that, on paper, could not be more different—one is a 15-watt mobile chip from 2018, the other a 105-watt server part from 2014. Yet benchmark data places them in a statistical dead heat. The i7-8560U edges out a win in all six Cinebench comparisons, but the margins are razor-thin, ranging from 0.0% to just 1.3%. The average benchmark scores are 1631 for the mobile chip and 1630 for the Xeon, a 0.1% difference that puts both at the 39th percentile of all CPUs. This raises a compelling question: what does a four-year generational gap and a seven-fold TDP difference actually buy you in raw compute?

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i7-8560U wins every single-core Cinebench test, but by the slimmest of margins. In Cinebench R15 single-core, it scores 80 versus the Xeon's 79, a 1.3% advantage. The gap shrinks to 0.3% in R20 (334 vs 333) and 0.1% in R23 (796 vs 795).

Q: Are the two processors evenly matched in multi-core workloads?

A: Yes, remarkably so. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, both chips score exactly 568. The i7-8560U takes R20 multi-core by 2369 to 2367 (a 0.1% lead) and R23 multi-core by 5641 to 5637 (also 0.1%). The data shows a near-perfect tie in multi-threaded rendering.

Q: What is the TDP difference between these two chips?

A: The i7-8560U has a TDP of 15 watts, while the Xeon E5-2623 v3 has a TDP of 105 watts. The mobile chip achieves virtually identical performance using only about 14% of the power envelope of the server processor.

Q: How do their memory systems differ?

A: The Xeon E5-2623 v3 supports quad-channel DDR4 memory with a theoretical bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s, while the i7-8560U uses dual-channel DDR3 or DDR4 with a bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, which the i7 does not.

Q: Which processor was released earlier?

A: The Xeon E5-2623 v3 was released on September 7, 2014, while the Core i7-8560U came out on September 30, 2018—a gap of just over four years. Both are now end-of-life products.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each chip?

A: The i7-8560U has an average benchmark score of 1631, and the Xeon E5-2623 v3 has an average of 1630. The nearest rival to both is the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G, which scores 1640, and the Intel Pentium Gold G7400T, which scores 1628.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is substantial, spanning four years of Intel design evolution. The i7-8560U is built on Whiskey Lake, a 14 nm architecture, while the Xeon E5-2623 v3 uses the older 22 nm Haswell-EP process. This process shrink is a major factor in the power disparity: the mobile chip fits its four cores and 8 MB of shared L3 cache into a 15-watt envelope, whereas the server chip uses 105 watts for its four cores and 10 MB of shared L3 cache.

The Xeon's larger 10 MB L3 cache is one of its few structural advantages, along with its 2,600 million transistors on a 356 mm² die. The i7-8560U's cache hierarchy is identical at the L1 and L2 levels (64 KB and 256 KB per core), but it has less L3. Both chips feature 4 cores and 8 threads, so threading is not a differentiator. The Xeon is built on the Haswell-EP generation, which is a server-focused design with support for ECC memory and a quad-channel memory bus, while the i7-8560U is a mobile part with integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 620) and a dual-channel memory bus.

The PCIe configurations also diverge sharply. The Xeon offers 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU, while the i7-8560U provides only 16 Gen 3 lanes. This reflects their intended roles: the Xeon is designed to feed multiple expansion cards and high-bandwidth peripherals in a workstation, while the mobile chip is limited by laptop board constraints. The i7 also has a boost clock of 4.60 GHz versus the Xeon's 3.50 GHz, but the Xeon has a higher base clock at 3.00 GHz compared to the i7's 1.80 GHz. These clock differences are offset by the architectural efficiency gains of Whiskey Lake over Haswell.

Where Each One Wins

Looking at the benchmark data, the i7-8560U wins all six head-to-head tests, but the practical implications of those wins are minimal given the tiny deltas. The largest margin is a 1.3% lead in Cinebench R15 single-core, which suggests the i7 has a slight edge in lightly-threaded tasks that rely on single-core speed. The i7's 4.60 GHz boost clock versus the Xeon's 3.50 GHz likely drives this advantage, even though the older Haswell core is still competitive.

The Xeon E5-2623 v3 does not win a single benchmark in this comparison, so its "wins" must be inferred from its platform features rather than raw compute scores. The data shows it supports ECC memory, which is critical for error-sensitive workloads like financial modeling or scientific computing. Its quad-channel memory bus provides 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth, which is 55% higher than the i7's 38.4 GB/s, even though this does not translate into Cinebench wins. The Xeon's 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes also make it the better choice for systems requiring multiple GPUs or high-speed networking cards, where the i7's 16 lanes would be a bottleneck.

For mobile users, the i7-8560U's 15-watt TDP and integrated graphics make it a clear winner for laptops, as it requires no discrete GPU and runs on battery power. The Xeon, with its 105-watt TDP and no integrated graphics, is strictly for socketed server or workstation boards with dedicated cooling.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i7-8560U | Intel Xeon E5-2623 v3 |

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

| Base Clock | 1.80 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.60 GHz | 3.50 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 105 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1528 | Intel Socket 2011-3 |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 22 nm |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | 10 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR3, DDR4 | DDR4 |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 38.4 GB/s | 59.7 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe Lanes | 16 (Gen 3) | 40 (Gen 3) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 620 | None |

| Transistors | Not specified | 2,600 million |

| Die Size | Not specified | 356 mm² |

| Launch MSRP | Not specified | $444 |

The specification table highlights the fundamental design philosophies. The i7-8560U is a high-frequency, low-power part with a 4.60 GHz boost clock, while the Xeon is a lower-frequency, higher-power part with a 3.00 GHz base clock that it can sustain across all cores. The Xeon's larger L3 cache and quad-channel memory are server-oriented, while the i7's integrated graphics and dual-channel memory are mobile-oriented.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are remarkably consistent, with the i7-8560U winning every test by less than a rounding error in most cases. The largest single win is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the i7 scores 80 against the Xeon's 79, a 1.3% delta. This is the only test where the margin exceeds 1%, indicating that the i7's higher boost clock provides a tangible, though small, advantage in single-threaded workloads.

In multi-core tests, the two chips are virtually indistinguishable. Cinebench R15 multi-core is a perfect tie at 568 points for both. The i7 takes R20 multi-core by just 2 points (2369 vs 2367, a 0.1% delta) and R23 multi-core by 4 points (5641 vs 5637, also 0.1%). These differences are within the noise of typical benchmark variance, so the data effectively shows parity in multi-threaded rendering despite the Xeon's higher TDP and larger cache.

The single-core results follow the same pattern. In R20 single-core, the i7 leads 334 to 333 (0.3%), and in R23 single-core, it leads 796 to 795 (0.1%). The i7's wins are consistent but narrow, suggesting that the Whiskey Lake architecture's improved instructions-per-clock and higher boost clock give it a slight edge, but not enough to meaningfully separate the two in real-world tasks. The average benchmark scores confirm this: 1631 for the i7 and 1630 for the Xeon, with the i7's nearest rival being the Xeon at a 0.1% delta.

The Verdict

The data tells a story of convergence, where a 2018 mobile processor and a 2014 server processor deliver nearly identical Cinebench performance. For a laptop user, the i7-8560U is the obvious choice based on its 15-watt TDP, integrated graphics, and 4.60 GHz boost clock. It offers the same multi-core compute as the Xeon while consuming a fraction of the power, making it suitable for thin-and-light notebooks where battery life and thermals are paramount.

For a server or workstation builder, the Xeon E5-2623 v3 justifies its existence through platform features that have no bearing on Cinebench scores. The data shows it supports ECC memory, quad-channel DDR4 with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth, and 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes. These are the specs that matter for memory-heavy databases, virtualization hosts, or compute clusters that need error correction and high I/O throughput. The Xeon's 105-watt TDP and 356 mm² die are acceptable trade-offs for a socketed board with robust cooling.

The verdict from the benchmark data alone is that raw compute is a tie. The i7-8560U takes all six wins, but the margins (0.0% to 1.3%) are negligible. The deciding factor between these two chips rests entirely on the intended platform: mobile versus server, integrated graphics versus ECC support, dual-channel versus quad-channel memory. Buyers should pick the i7 for portable computing and the Xeon for reliability-focused workstation builds, recognizing that neither has a meaningful performance advantage over the other in Cinebench workloads.