Intel Core i7-8700T vs Intel Xeon E5-4650 v3 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E5-4650 v3 and Intel Core i7-8700T represent two very different answers to the same question: how to get strong multi-threaded performance without a massive power draw. The Xeon is a server-grade 12-core part from the Haswell-EP generation, while the i7-8700T is a low-power desktop chip from the Coffee Lake era. The benchmark data shows a clear, consistent pattern: the older Xeon wins every single Cinebench test, but the margins are surprisingly narrow, and the i7-8700T brings a set of platform advantages that matter for many builders. This analysis splits the two by workload, architecture, and specification to show exactly where each chip fits.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon E5-4650 v3 wins outright in raw compute performance. Across all six head-to-head Cinebench runs, it takes the crown, with victories ranging from 5.9% to 6.5%. Its biggest win comes in the Cinebench R15 single-core test, where it scores 131 against the i7-8700T's 123, a 6.5% advantage. The multicore results are equally decisive: the Xeon posts 928 in R15 multicore versus 876, and 9212 in R23 multicore versus 8698. If the workload is purely about shaving seconds off a render or a simulation, the Xeon is the consistent winner.

The i7-8700T wins where the benchmarks don't directly measure: platform efficiency. Its 35W TDP is one-third of the Xeon's 105W, making it the clear choice for compact, low-noise, or always-on systems. The i7-8700T also includes integrated UHD Graphics 630, while the Xeon has no integrated graphics at all, meaning the i7 can run a basic desktop without a discrete GPU. In terms of average benchmark score, the i7-8700T actually edges ahead at 2701 versus the Xeon's 2664, which reflects the fact that the i7's benchmark profile includes Geekbench results that the Xeon lacks. That said, the Xeon holds a 50th percentile rank among all CPUs, and the i7-8700T also sits at the 50th percentile, so neither is a performance outlier in the broader market.

Architecture Differences

The two chips are separated by three years of Intel architecture evolution, and the data reflects that. The Xeon E5-4650 v3 uses the Haswell-EP architecture on a 22nm process node, built on a 356 mm² die with 2,600 million transistors. Its cache layout is generous: 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and a 30 MB shared L3. This is a server-class design meant to feed 12 cores and 24 threads with a quad-channel DDR4 memory bus, delivering 68.3 GB/s of memory bandwidth.

The i7-8700T uses the Coffee Lake architecture on a 14nm node, with a much smaller 154 mm² die. It has the same per-core L1 and L2 cache sizes, but its shared L3 is a mere 12 MB. The memory interface is dual-channel, providing 42.7 GB/s of bandwidth. The process node advantage is clear: 14nm allows for a smaller die and lower power, but the Xeon's larger L3 and quad-channel memory controller are classic server features that give it a throughput edge in memory-heavy workloads. The i7-8700T also lacks ECC memory support, while the Xeon includes it, a critical differentiator for data-integrity-sensitive environments.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is a clean sweep for the Xeon, but the margins tell a nuanced story. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Xeon scores 928 against 876, a 5.9% lead. That's a solid win for a chip with double the cores and threads, but it's not a landslide. The single-core R15 result shows the Xeon ahead by 6.5% (131 vs 123), which is surprising given the i7-8700T's much higher 4.00 GHz boost clock versus the Xeon's 2.80 GHz. The Xeon's Haswell architecture apparently compensates with better instructions-per-clock in this test, or the i7's 35W power limit throttles its boost under load.

The pattern repeats in R20 and R23. In R20, the Xeon wins multicore 3869 to 3653 (5.9%) and single-core 546 to 515 (6%). In R23, the Xeon takes multicore 9212 to 8698 (5.9%) and single-core 1300 to 1228 (5.9%). The consistency of the 5.9-6% delta across all multicore tests suggests a fixed performance ceiling for the i7-8700T, likely its power envelope. The i7-8700T's Geekbench scores are not part of the head-to-head comparison, but its single-core Geekbench result of 1343 and multicore of 5168 give it a higher average benchmark score (2701) than the Xeon (2664), purely because that test is included in its average.

Specification Differences

The specification sheet reveals a tale of two design philosophies. The Xeon E5-4650 v3 offers 12 cores and 24 threads, while the i7-8700T halves that to 6 cores and 12 threads. The Xeon's base clock is 2.10 GHz with a boost of 2.80 GHz; the i7-8700T runs at 2.40 GHz base and boosts to 4.00 GHz. The TDP difference is stark: 105W for the Xeon versus 35W for the i7-8700T.

Socket compatibility is a major split. The Xeon uses Intel Socket 2011-3, typically found in dual-socket server motherboards, while the i7-8700T uses Intel Socket 1151, common in mainstream desktops. Memory support differs: the Xeon supports quad-channel DDR4 with ECC and 68.3 GB/s bandwidth, while the i7-8700T is dual-channel, non-ECC, with 42.7 GB/s. PCIe lanes also differ, with the Xeon offering 40 Gen 3 lanes (CPU only) versus the i7's 16 Gen 3 lanes. The i7-8700T includes integrated UHD Graphics 630; the Xeon has none. The Xeon's launch MSRP was $2838, and it was released in May 2015; the i7-8700T has no listed launch MSRP and arrived in April 2018. Both parts are end-of-life and locked multipliers.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in single-core tasks?

A: The Xeon E5-4650 v3 wins every single-core Cinebench test. It scores 131 in R15 single-core versus 123 for the i7-8700T, a 6.5% lead. In R23 single-core, the Xeon scores 1300 versus 1228, a 5.9% advantage. This is despite the i7-8700T's higher 4.00 GHz boost clock.

Q: How much power does each CPU draw?

A: The Xeon E5-4650 v3 has a 105W TDP, while the i7-8700T has a 35W TDP. The i7-8700T draws one-third the power of the Xeon, making it far more suitable for low-power or compact builds.

Q: Does the i7-8700T have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the i7-8700T includes UHD Graphics 630. The Xeon E5-4650 v3 has no integrated graphics, so it requires a discrete GPU for any display output.

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: Only the Xeon E5-4650 v3 supports ECC memory. The i7-8700T does not, which makes the Xeon the appropriate choice for error-correcting memory in critical workloads.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Xeon E5-4650 v3 supports quad-channel DDR4 with 68.3 GB/s bandwidth. The i7-8700T supports dual-channel DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Xeon offers roughly 60% more memory bandwidth.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: The Xeon E5-4650 v3 has 12 cores and 24 threads. The i7-8700T has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Xeon has exactly double the core and thread count.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split by use case. Choose the Xeon E5-4650 v3 if your priority is maximum multi-threaded throughput in a server or workstation environment. It wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, with a 5.9% lead in every multicore benchmark and a 5.9-6.5% lead in single-core tests. The 12 cores, 24 threads, 30 MB L3 cache, and quad-channel memory with ECC support make it the better tool for rendering, virtualization, or any workload that scales with cores and memory bandwidth. Its 105W TDP is high, but that is the cost of server-class performance.

Choose the Intel Core i7-8700T if your priorities are power efficiency, platform simplicity, and integrated graphics. The 35W TDP makes it ideal for always-on systems, small form factor builds, or any scenario where heat and noise are critical constraints. The i7-8700T's dual-channel memory and 12 MB L3 are adequate for mainstream desktop tasks, and its higher 4.00 GHz boost clock gives it respectable single-thread performance, even if the benchmarks show the Xeon edging it out. The i7-8700T also has a higher average benchmark score (2701 vs 2664) when including Geekbench results, indicating a more balanced overall profile. For a general-purpose desktop that sips power, the i7-8700T is the pragmatic pick. For a compute-focused rig where every percentage point of performance matters, the Xeon is the data-backed winner.