Intel Core i7-8700B vs Intel Xeon E5-2650 v4 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark split is decisively one-sided, but the underlying reasons are worth unpacking. The Intel Xeon E5-2650 v4 wins all six recorded head-to-head tests, covering both multi-core and single-core workloads. The Intel Core i7-8700B does not claim a single victory in the database's comparison set. This does not mean the i7-8700B is without merit, but within the measured Cinebench suite, the Xeon holds a consistent edge.

The Xeon's advantage is most pronounced in multi-threaded rendering tasks. Its 12 cores and 24 threads provide a substantial parallel workload capability that the 6-core, 12-thread i7-8700B cannot match. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Xeon scores 10,904 against 9,977 for the i7, a 9.3% lead. That margin repeats almost exactly across the R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests, suggesting a structural advantage tied to core count rather than a workload-specific quirk.

Single-core performance tells a more nuanced story. The Xeon's boost clock is 2.90 GHz, while the i7-8700B boosts to 4.60 GHz. Despite that 1.70 GHz deficit in rated clock speed, the Xeon still wins the single-core tests by 9.3% to 9.9%. This is a counterintuitive result. The recorded data shows the Xeon at 1,539 in Cinebench R23 single-core versus 1,408 for the i7. The older Broadwell architecture, despite its lower clock ceiling, delivers higher single-thread scores in these specific tests. This suggests that factors beyond raw clock speed, such as memory bandwidth or cache behavior, play a measurable role in the Xeon's favor.

For a buyer or system planner, the use-case split is clear. The Xeon E5-2650 v4 is the stronger choice for multi-core rendering, data processing, or any workload that scales with thread count. The i7-8700B, while losing every benchmark here, is a desktop-class chip with integrated graphics and a much lower launch MSRP of $303. The Xeon's launch MSRP was $1,166. Neither chip is currently in production, both are marked end-of-life, but the Xeon's server heritage and 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes make it more suitable for workstation expansion. The i7's 16 PCIe lanes and dual-channel memory bus fit a more constrained desktop footprint.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2650 v4 has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core i7-8700B has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: Does the Xeon support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Xeon E5-2650 v4 supports ECC memory. The Core i7-8700B does not.

Q: How much faster is the Xeon in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: The Xeon scores 10,904 versus 9,977 for the i7-8700B, a 9.3% difference.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Core i7-8700B includes UHD Graphics 630. The Xeon E5-2650 v4 has no integrated graphics.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Xeon supports quad-channel DDR4 with 68.3 GB/s bandwidth. The i7-8700B uses dual-channel DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s.

Q: Are both processors on the same manufacturing node?

A: Yes, both use Intel's 14 nm process. However, the Xeon is based on Broadwell-EP architecture while the i7 uses Coffee Lake.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a consistent pattern across six Cinebench tests. The Xeon E5-2650 v4 wins every comparison, with margins ranging from 9.3% to 9.9%. The narrowest gap appears in the single-core tests, but even there the Xeon holds a firm lead.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 1,098 against 1,005 for the i7-8700B. That is a 9.3% advantage. The single-core R15 result is 155 versus 141, a 9.9% margin, the largest recorded difference in the entire comparison. Moving to R20, the multi-core score is 4,579 for the Xeon and 4,190 for the i7, again 9.3%. The R20 single-core test shows 646 versus 591, also 9.3%. Cinebench R23 repeats the pattern: multi-core 10,904 to 9,977, single-core 1,539 to 1,408. Every R23 comparison is 9.3%.

The most striking aspect is the single-core result. The i7-8700B has a 4.60 GHz boost clock, far above the Xeon's 2.90 GHz. Yet the Xeon wins single-core Cinebench tests by nearly 10%. This defies the typical expectation that higher clock speed dictates single-thread performance. The database's measurements indicate that the Xeon's architecture, possibly combined with its larger 30 MB shared L3 cache versus the i7's 12 MB, produces higher scores despite the clock deficit.

The i7-8700B has one additional benchmark in the database that the Xeon lacks: Geekbench. Its multi-core score is 5,936 and single-core is 1,443. There is no corresponding Geekbench score for the Xeon, so a direct comparison cannot be made. The average benchmark scores, however, place the Xeon at 3,154 and the i7 at 3,086. These averages include different test sets, so the raw difference of 68 points should be interpreted with caution.

The Xeon's nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5850U at 3,159 average score, a 0.2% gap, and the Intel Xeon E5-2676 v3 at 3,163, a 0.3% gap. The i7-8700B sits closest to the Intel Xeon W-2133 at 3,087, a 0.0% difference, and the Intel Xeon E5-1660 v3 at 3,082, a 0.1% gap. These surrounding data points confirm that both CPUs occupy a similar performance tier by average score, even though the head-to-head Cinebench results favor the Xeon.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every major specification axis. The Xeon E5-2650 v4 offers 12 cores and 24 threads, while the i7-8700B provides 6 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks are 2.20 GHz for the Xeon and 3.20 GHz for the i7. Boost clocks are 2.90 GHz and 4.60 GHz respectively. The Xeon's TDP is 105 watts, the i7's is 65 watts.

Memory configuration diverges sharply. The Xeon uses quad-channel DDR4 with 68.3 GB/s bandwidth and supports ECC. The i7 uses dual-channel DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s and no ECC support. Both support DDR4 memory, but the Xeon's channel count doubles the theoretical bandwidth.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Xeon provides Gen 3 with 40 lanes from the CPU. The i7 provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes. The Xeon's socket is Intel Socket 2011-3, while the i7 uses Intel BGA 1440, a soldered mobile/desktop hybrid package. The Xeon's market segment is server and workstation, the i7's is desktop. The Xeon has no integrated graphics; the i7 includes UHD Graphics 630.

Die size and transistor count are not fully comparable. The Xeon lists 3,400 million transistors on a 246 mm² die. The i7 lists a 154 mm² die with no transistor count in the database. Both are built on Intel's 14 nm process at Intel's foundry. The Xeon's launch MSRP was $1,166, while the i7's was $303. Both are end-of-life and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is generational and functional. The Xeon E5-2650 v4 uses Broadwell architecture, specifically the Broadwell-EP server variant. The i7-8700B uses Coffee Lake, a desktop-oriented architecture. Both are 14 nm parts from Intel, but they target different segments and design goals.

The Xeon's cache hierarchy is built for server workloads. Each core has 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2, matching the i7's per-core allocation. The shared L3 cache, however, is 30 MB on the Xeon versus 12 MB on the i7. That 18 MB difference is substantial, and it likely contributes to the Xeon's single-core wins despite its lower clock speed. Larger shared caches reduce latency for frequently accessed data and improve hit rates in multi-threaded server environments.

The i7-8700B's Coffee Lake architecture benefits from a newer design generation, released in April 2018 versus March 2016 for the Xeon. The i7's higher clock speeds, 4.60 GHz boost, reflect the architectural improvements in frequency scaling. Its die is smaller at 154 mm², and it integrates graphics, which the Xeon lacks entirely. The Xeon's larger 246 mm² die accommodates more cores and a bigger L3 cache.

Memory controller differences are part of the architecture. The Xeon's quad-channel DDR4 controller with ECC support is a server-grade feature. The i7's dual-channel controller without ECC is standard for desktop parts. The Xeon's 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes provide expansion headroom for multiple accelerators or storage devices, while the i7's 16 lanes suit a single GPU and basic peripherals.

Production status is identical: both are end-of-life. The Xeon's part number is SR2N3, the i7's is SRCX2. Neither has integrated graphics on the Xeon side, which is expected for server parts. The i7's UHD Graphics 630 is a meaningful inclusion for desktop systems without a discrete GPU, but it does not appear in the benchmark data, so its performance cannot be assessed here.

The architectural differences explain the benchmark outcomes. The Xeon's core count and cache capacity drive its multi-core wins. Its single-core wins are less obvious but consistent across all three Cinebench generations. The i7's higher clock speed does not translate into a benchmark advantage in the recorded tests. The database measurements place the Xeon at the 53rd percentile among all CPUs, with the i7 at the 52nd. The Xeon's average benchmark score is 3,154, the i7's is 3,086. These are close figures, but the head-to-head Cinebench suite favors the Xeon in every recorded instance.