Intel Core i7-8700T vs Intel Xeon E5-2640 v3 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E5-2640 v3 and the Intel Core i7-8700T sit at nearly identical average benchmark scores, with the Xeon achieving 2703 and the i7 achieving 2701—a difference of just 0.1%. Yet a closer look at their individual test results reveals a clear pattern: the Xeon E5-2640 v3 wins every single head-to-head benchmark in the data, despite the i7-8700T having a significantly higher boost clock. This makes the pair a fascinating study of how core count, memory architecture, and platform design can offset raw clock speed advantages.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Xeon E5-2640 v3’s dominance is consistent across all six Cinebench tests, with winning margins ranging from 7.3% to 7.5%. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 942 versus the i7-8700T’s 876, a 7.5% advantage. The single-core R15 test tells a similar story: 132 for the Xeon against 123 for the i7, a 7.3% lead. This is particularly noteworthy because the i7-8700T has a 4.00 GHz boost clock, while the Xeon’s boost tops out at 3.40 GHz—yet the Xeon still pulls ahead in single-threaded performance.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the pattern holds. The Xeon scores 3926 multi-core versus 3653 for the i7, again a 7.5% edge. In single-core R20, the Xeon’s 553 beats the i7’s 515 by 7.4%. The most recent Cinebench R23 results reinforce this trend: the Xeon achieves 9348 multi-core and 1319 single-core, while the i7-8700T manages 8698 and 1228, respectively—both 7.5% and 7.4% behind.

The data suggests the Xeon’s advantage stems from its 8 cores and 16 threads, compared to the i7’s 6 cores and 12 threads. Even with a lower boost clock, the Xeon’s extra two physical cores (and four threads) provide enough parallel processing headroom to overcome the i7’s clock speed advantage. Interestingly, the i7-8700T does have a Geekbench result—5168 multi-core and 1343 single-core—but no comparable Geekbench score exists for the Xeon in the data, so these cannot be directly compared. Overall, the Xeon wins all 6 head-to-head tests, with the i7 winning none.

The Verdict

From the benchmark data alone, the Intel Xeon E5-2640 v3 is the clear performance winner. It leads the i7-8700T in every Cinebench test by roughly 7.3% to 7.5%, across both multi-core and single-core workloads. For anyone prioritizing raw compute performance—especially in threaded applications like video rendering, 3D modeling, or server-side workloads—the Xeon is the superior choice based on these numbers.

However, the i7-8700T is not without its merits. Its 35W TDP is dramatically lower than the Xeon’s 90W TDP, making it a far more power-efficient option for compact or thermally constrained systems. The i7 also includes integrated UHD Graphics 630, which the Xeon lacks entirely, meaning the i7 can function in a system without a discrete GPU. For users who need a low-power desktop CPU with built-in graphics, the i7-8700T is the pragmatic pick—but for pure processing power, the Xeon’s data speaks for itself.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and are built on different process nodes. The Xeon E5-2640 v3 uses the Haswell-EP architecture on a 22 nm process, while the i7-8700T uses Coffee Lake on a 14 nm process. The Xeon’s die is substantially larger at 356 mm², compared to the i7’s 154 mm², and the Xeon contains 2,600 million transistors—the i7’s transistor count is not listed in the data.

Cache configurations differ significantly. Both have 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core, but the Xeon offers 20 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i7-8700T has only 12 MB. This larger cache pool on the Xeon likely contributes to its consistent benchmark advantage, especially in workloads that benefit from more data being held closer to the cores.

The platforms are entirely different as well. The Xeon uses Intel Socket 2011-3 with quad-channel DDR4 memory and a memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s, while the i7-8700T uses Intel Socket 1151 with dual-channel DDR4 and 42.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, which the i7 does not, and offers 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes (CPU only) versus the i7’s 16 lanes. The Xeon is classified as a server/workstation part, while the i7 is a desktop part.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2640 v3 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core i7-8700T has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: Does the Xeon E5-2640 v3 win all benchmark tests?

A: Yes, the Xeon wins all 6 head-to-head Cinebench tests, with margins between 7.3% and 7.5% over the i7-8700T.

Q: Which CPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The i7-8700T has a 4.00 GHz boost clock, while the Xeon E5-2640 v3 boosts to 3.40 GHz.

Q: Does the i7-8700T support ECC memory?

A: No, the i7-8700T does not support ECC memory. The Xeon E5-2640 v3 does support ECC memory.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Xeon E5-2640 v3 offers 59.7 GB/s memory bandwidth via quad-channel DDR4, while the i7-8700T provides 42.7 GB/s via dual-channel DDR4.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: Only the i7-8700T has integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630). The Xeon E5-2640 v3 has no integrated graphics.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon E5-2640 v3 is the outright winner in all six Cinebench benchmarks, making it the superior choice for CPU-intensive tasks that rely on sustained multi-threaded performance. Its 8-core/16-thread configuration, larger 20 MB L3 cache, and quad-channel memory with higher bandwidth position it well for server workloads, workstation rendering, or any application that can leverage more threads and faster memory access. The 7.5% multi-core advantage in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 suggests consistent scaling across different Cinebench versions.

The i7-8700T, despite losing every benchmark, wins decisively in other categories. Its 35W TDP makes it far more suitable for small-form-factor PCs, all-in-one systems, or any build where power draw and heat output are critical constraints. The integrated UHD Graphics 630 means it can run entirely without a discrete GPU, which is impossible with the Xeon. Its smaller 154 mm² die and 14 nm process also imply a more efficient design for typical desktop use cases. For users who value low power consumption and built-in graphics over raw compute performance, the i7-8700T is the clear winner.

Specification Differences

The two CPUs differ in nearly every major specification category. The Xeon E5-2640 v3 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the i7-8700T has 6 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks are 2.60 GHz for the Xeon and 2.40 GHz for the i7, but boost clocks favor the i7 at 4.00 GHz versus the Xeon’s 3.40 GHz. The Xeon’s TDP is 90W, compared to the i7’s 35W.

The sockets are incompatible: Xeon uses Intel Socket 2011-3, while the i7 uses Intel Socket 1151. The Xeon’s architecture is Haswell-EP on a 22 nm process, whereas the i7 is Coffee Lake on a 14 nm process. Cache differs with the Xeon offering 20 MB shared L3 and the i7 offering 12 MB shared L3. Memory support diverges on bandwidth (59.7 GB/s vs 42.7 GB/s) and channel count (quad vs dual). The Xeon supports ECC memory and has 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, while the i7 has no ECC support and only 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes. The Xeon has no integrated graphics; the i7 includes UHD Graphics 630. The Xeon’s die size is 356 mm² with 2,600 million transistors, while the i7’s die is 154 mm² with no listed transistor count.