Intel Core i7-8565U vs Intel Xeon Platinum 8268 Comparison

The Intel Core i7-8565U and Intel Xeon Platinum 8268 represent opposite ends of Intel's 14nm product stack. The i7-8565U is a 4-core mobile processor with a 15W TDP, integrated UHD Graphics 620, and a 4.60 GHz boost clock. The Xeon Platinum 8268 is a 24-core server processor with a 205W TDP, ECC memory support, and a 3.90 GHz boost clock. The database records six head-to-head Cinebench comparisons between them, and the Xeon wins all six.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are one-sided. The Xeon Platinum 8268 wins all six recorded comparisons, and the i7-8565U records zero wins. The margin is consistent: the i7 trails by 81.7% in five of the six tests, and by 81.9% in the remaining one.

In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Xeon scores 28749 against the i7's 5258. The single-core R23 test shows 4058 versus 742, the same 81.7% gap. The consistency across single and multi-core tests is notable. The i7's boost clock of 4.60 GHz is higher than the Xeon's 3.90 GHz, yet the Xeon still leads single-core Cinebench by the same margin as multi-core. This suggests the Xeon's Cascade Lake architecture delivers more work per clock in these workloads, or the i7's boost is not sustained under the test conditions.

Cinebench R20 repeats the pattern: 12074 versus 2208 in multicore, 1704 versus 311 in single-core, both at -81.7%. Cinebench R15 multicore: 2897 versus 529, -81.7%. R15 single-core: 408 versus 74, -81.9%, the largest gap in the set.

The broader database tells a more nuanced story. The i7-8565U has an average benchmark score of 8665 across all its recorded tests, placing it at the 65th percentile of all CPUs. The Xeon Platinum 8268 averages 8315, at the 64th percentile. So the i7 actually ranks slightly higher in the overall database, despite losing every head-to-head Cinebench test. This is because the i7's recorded benchmarks include Passmark tests (data compression at 75995, integer math at 21581, floating point math at 12934, and others), while the Xeon's recorded benchmarks are limited to the six Cinebench tests.

The nearest-rival data reinforces this. The i7-8565U's average score of 8665 sits 0.1% below the Intel Core i9-13900E (8676) and 0.5% below the Intel Core i5-8365U (8708), while sitting 0.5% above the AMD EPYC 7601 (8619) and 1% above the Intel Core i7-10510U (8580). The Xeon's 8315 is tied with the Intel Xeon Gold 5320T (8316, 0% delta), 0.1% above the Intel Xeon D-2799 (8308), 0.3% above the Intel Core i7-1065G7 (8293), and 0.4% below the Intel Core i5-10210U (8344).

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the head-to-head Cinebench tests?

A: The Intel Xeon Platinum 8268 wins all six recorded head-to-head tests. The i7-8565U records zero wins, trailing by 81.7% in five tests and 81.9% in Cinebench R15 single-core.

Q: Does the i7-8565U have any advantages in the recorded data?

A: Yes. The i7 has a higher boost clock (4.60 GHz versus 3.90 GHz), a much lower TDP (15W versus 205W), integrated UHD Graphics 620, and a higher average benchmark score (8665 versus 8315) with a higher percentile rank (65th versus 64th).

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Only the Xeon Platinum 8268 supports ECC memory. The i7-8565U does not.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: The i7-8565U has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Xeon Platinum 8268 has 24 cores and 48 threads.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The i7-8565U includes Intel UHD Graphics 620. The Xeon Platinum 8268 has no integrated graphics.

Q: How do the cache sizes compare?

A: Both have 64 KB of L1 per core. The i7 has 256 KB of L2 per core and 8 MB of shared L3. The Xeon has 1 MB of L2 per core and 35.75 MB of shared L3.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on Intel's 14nm process, but they belong to different architecture families. The i7-8565U is Whiskey Lake, specifically the Whiskey Lake-U codename, a mobile-focused design. The Xeon Platinum 8268 is Cascade Lake, specifically Cascade Lake-SP, a server and workstation part.

The core and thread counts differ substantially. The i7 has 4 cores and 8 threads; the Xeon has 24 cores and 48 threads. The Xeon's transistor count is recorded at 8,000 million, while the i7's is not listed in the database.

The cache hierarchy scales with the core count. Both use 64 KB of L1 per core. The i7 has 256 KB of L2 per core and 8 MB of shared L3. The Xeon has 1 MB of L2 per core and 35.75 MB of shared L3. The Xeon's larger L2 per core and larger L3 reflect its server positioning.

Memory support diverges significantly. The i7 supports DDR3 and DDR4 with a dual-channel memory bus and a recorded bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. The Xeon supports DDR4 only, and its memory bus and bandwidth are not recorded in the database. ECC memory is supported on the Xeon but not the i7.

The i7 includes integrated UHD Graphics 620, making it a self-contained mobile processor. The Xeon has no integrated graphics. The i7 uses the Intel BGA 1528 socket and is classified as a mobile part. The Xeon uses Intel Socket 3647 and is classified as server/workstation.

The i7 is marked end-of-life in the database, while the Xeon's production status is not recorded. The i7 was released on 2018-09-30, the Xeon on 2018-12-10.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications differ in nearly every field:

• Cores: 4 (i7) versus 24 (Xeon)
• Threads: 8 versus 48
• Base clock: 1800 MHz versus 2900 MHz
• Boost clock: 4.60 GHz versus 3.90 GHz
• TDP: 15W versus 205W
• Socket: Intel BGA 1528 versus Intel Socket 3647
• Architecture: Whiskey Lake versus Cascade Lake
• Codename: Whiskey Lake-U versus Cascade Lake-SP
• L2 cache: 256 KB per core versus 1 MB per core
• L3 cache: 8 MB shared versus 35.75 MB shared
• Memory support: DDR3, DDR4 versus DDR4 only
• Memory bus: Dual-channel versus not recorded
• Memory bandwidth: 38.4 GB/s versus not recorded
• ECC memory: false versus true
• PCIe: Gen 3, 16 lanes (CPU only) versus not recorded
• Integrated graphics: UHD Graphics 620 versus none
• Market segment: Mobile versus Server/Workstation
• Production status: End-of-life versus not recorded
• Release date: 2018-09-30 versus 2018-12-10
• Launch MSRP: $409 versus not recorded
• Transistors: not recorded versus 8,000 million

The i7's launch MSRP is $409. The Xeon's launch MSRP is not recorded in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon Platinum 8268 wins every recorded head-to-head benchmark. In Cinebench R23 multicore, it scores 28749 against the i7's 5258. In R23 single-core, 4058 against 742. The pattern holds across R15, R20, and R23, with the i7 trailing by 81.7% to 81.9% in every test. The Xeon's 24 cores, 48 threads, and 35.75 MB of L3 cache drive this dominance.

The i7-8565U wins in areas outside the Cinebench suite. Its average benchmark score of 8665 exceeds the Xeon's 8315, and its 65th percentile rank edges out the Xeon's 64th. The i7's Passmark results, including data compression at 75995, integer math at 21581, floating point math at 12934, and random string sorting at 10200, contribute to this average. The Xeon has no recorded Passmark results.

The i7 also wins on power efficiency. Its 15W TDP is dramatically lower than the Xeon's 205W. It includes integrated graphics, making it a self-contained mobile solution. Its boost clock of 4.60 GHz is higher than the Xeon's 3.90 GHz, which helps in bursty single-threaded scenarios, though the recorded Cinebench single-core results favor the Xeon.

The Xeon wins on raw throughput, core count, cache capacity, and ECC support. Its 24 cores and 48 threads, 35.75 MB of L3, and ECC memory support make it suited for server workloads where data integrity and parallel throughput matter more than power draw.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split. For compute-heavy server or workstation workloads, the Xeon Platinum 8268 is the obvious choice. It wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests by margins of 81.7% or more, offers 24 cores and 48 threads, 35.75 MB of L3 cache, and ECC memory support. Its 205W TDP reflects its server positioning.

For mobile or low-power applications, the i7-8565U is the only viable option of the two. It has a 15W TDP, integrated UHD Graphics 620, and a higher boost clock of 4.60 GHz. Its average benchmark score of 8665 and 65th percentile rank actually place it slightly above the Xeon in the overall database, though this is driven by Passmark tests that the Xeon does not have recorded.

The choice depends entirely on the use case. A server administrator needing ECC and massive parallel throughput should pick the Xeon. A laptop designer needing integrated graphics and low power draw should pick the i7. Neither processor serves the other's role well.