Intel Core i7-8809G vs Intel Xeon E5-4648 v3 Comparison

The Intel Core i7-8809G and the Intel Xeon E5-4648 v3 occupy different corners of the hardware landscape, yet their benchmark records place them within a narrow performance band. The Core i7-8809G is a mobile-focused part with a Radeon RX Vega M GH integrated graphics solution, while the Xeon E5-4648 v3 is a server and workstation processor built for multi-threaded throughput. Based on the recorded Cinebench results, the Xeon consistently posts higher scores across every test, but the margins are surprisingly thin given the architectural differences. The database shows the Xeon winning all six head-to-head comparisons, with the Core i7-8809G trailing by roughly 6.7 percent in multi-core workloads and about 6.4 to 6.8 percent in single-threaded tests. The average benchmark scores reinforce this pattern: the Core i7-8809G sits at 2307, while the Xeon E5-4648 v3 records 2227, placing the Xeon slightly lower overall despite its individual test victories. That inversion is worth examining, as is the fact that the Xeon’s percentile ranking (47) is just one point below the Core i7’s 48.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite provides the clearest picture of how these two processors compare. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon E5-4648 v3 scores 776 against the Core i7-8809G’s 724, a delta of negative 6.7 percent from the Core i7’s perspective. Single-core R15 shows a similar story: the Xeon posts 109, the Core i7 posts 102, resulting in a negative 6.4 percent delta. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multi-core test gives the Xeon 3234 and the Core i7 3017, again a negative 6.7 percent delta. The R20 single-core result is 456 for the Xeon versus 425 for the Core i7, a negative 6.8 percent delta, the largest gap in the entire set. Cinebench R23 repeats the pattern with multi-core scores of 7701 for the Xeon and 7185 for the Core i7 (negative 6.7 percent), and single-core scores of 1087 versus 1014 (negative 6.7 percent).

What stands out is the consistency of the margins. Every head-to-head delta falls between negative 6.4 and negative 6.8 percent, meaning the Xeon’s advantage is uniform across different Cinebench versions and workload types. This is not a case of one processor excelling in a specific test; the Xeon simply holds a steady edge. However, the Core i7-8809G has additional benchmark data that the Xeon lacks. The Geekbench tests show the Core i7 scoring 4590 in multi-core and 1401 in single-core, but no comparable Geekbench results exist for the Xeon in the database, so a direct comparison there is not possible.

The average benchmark score flips the narrative. The Core i7-8809G averages 2307 across its recorded tests, while the Xeon E5-4648 v3 averages 2227. This is because the Core i7’s Geekbench results, which are substantially higher than its Cinebench scores, pull its average upward. The Xeon has no Geekbench entries, so its average relies solely on Cinebench, which are lower relative to the Core i7’s mixed set. The nearest rivals for each processor illustrate where they sit in the broader field. The Core i7-8809G’s closest competitor is the Intel Core i5-10400H with an average score of 2303 (a 0.2 percent delta), followed by the Intel Xeon E-2134 at 2319 (negative 0.5 percent), the AMD Ryzen 7 2700 at 2320 (negative 0.6 percent), and the Intel Xeon E5-2629 v3 at 2283 (1.1 percent). The Xeon E5-4648 v3, by contrast, is bracketed by the Intel Core i7-8559U at 2225 (0.1 percent), the Intel Core i7-5775C at 2224 (0.1 percent), the Intel Xeon D-1548 at 2231 (negative 0.2 percent), and the Intel Xeon D-1715TER at 2238 (negative 0.5 percent). These rivalries show that both processors are mid-pack performers, with the Core i7-8809G’s average score placing it just above the Xeon’s despite the Xeon’s direct test wins.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon E5-4648 v3 wins outright in every recorded head-to-head benchmark. Its 12 cores and 24 threads provide a structural advantage in multi-threaded workloads, and the data confirms this: the Xeon leads by 52 points in Cinebench R15 multi-core (776 versus 724), by 217 points in R20 multi-core (3234 versus 3017), and by 516 points in R23 multi-core (7701 versus 7185). The single-core results also favor the Xeon, though the margins are smaller: 7 points in R15 (109 versus 102), 31 points in R20 (456 versus 425), and 73 points in R23 (1087 versus 1014). This suggests the Xeon’s higher base clock, listed as 1700.00 MHz, and its boost clock of 2.20 GHz, are sufficient to outperform the Core i7-8809G’s 3.10 GHz base and 4.20 GHz boost in these specific tests. The Xeon’s 30 MB of shared L3 cache, compared to the Core i7’s 8 MB, likely contributes to its consistent lead.

The Core i7-8809G, however, has a clear use case where it excels: integrated graphics. The Radeon RX Vega M GH is a substantial GPU solution for a mobile processor, and the Xeon has no integrated graphics at all. For systems that need a compact package with graphics capability, the Core i7-8809G is the only option between these two. Additionally, the Core i7’s Geekbench scores, while not directly comparable to the Xeon due to missing data, indicate strong performance in that benchmark suite. The Core i7’s average benchmark score of 2307 is higher than the Xeon’s 2227, which suggests that in a broader set of tests, the Core i7 could come out ahead. The Core i7 also has a lower TDP of 65 watts versus the Xeon’s 105 watts, making it more suitable for thermally constrained environments. The Xeon’s market segment is Server/Workstation, while the Core i7 is Mobile, so the intended workloads differ fundamentally.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i7-8809G has an average benchmark score of 2307, while the Intel Xeon E5-4648 v3 has an average of 2227. The Core i7’s average is higher because its Geekbench results are included in the calculation, whereas the Xeon only has Cinebench scores.

Q: How much faster is the Xeon E5-4648 v3 in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Xeon E5-4648 v3 scores 7701 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the Core i7-8809G scores 7185. This gives the Xeon a 516-point lead, corresponding to a negative 6.7 percent delta for the Core i7.

Q: Does the Core i7-8809G win any head-to-head benchmarks?

A: No. In the six recorded head-to-head Cinebench comparisons, the Xeon E5-4648 v3 wins all six. The Core i7-8809G has zero wins in this dataset.

Q: What is the core and thread difference between the two processors?

A: The Core i7-8809G has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Xeon E5-4648 v3 has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Xeon also has a larger shared L3 cache of 30 MB compared to the Core i7’s 8 MB.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-4648 v3 supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core i7-8809G does not. The Xeon also features quad-channel memory with a bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s, whereas the Core i7’s memory bus and bandwidth are not listed.

Q: How do their production statuses differ?

A: The Intel Core i7-8809G is marked as Active, while the Intel Xeon E5-4648 v3 is marked as End-of-life. The Core i7 was released on 2018-01-31, and the Xeon on 2015-05-31.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification. The Core i7-8809G has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Xeon E5-4648 v3 has 12 cores and 24 threads. Base clocks are starkly different: the Core i7 runs at 3.10 GHz, while the Xeon’s base clock is listed as 1700.00 MHz, a figure that reflects its server-oriented design. Boost clocks are 4.20 GHz for the Core i7 and 2.20 GHz for the Xeon. TDP also diverges, with the Core i7 at 65 watts and the Xeon at 105 watts. The sockets are incompatible: the Core i7 uses Intel BGA 2270, while the Xeon uses Intel Socket 2011-3.

Cache allocation shows the Xeon’s advantage: both have 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, but the L3 cache is 8 MB shared for the Core i7 and 30 MB shared for the Xeon. Memory support is DDR4 for both, but the Xeon adds quad-channel memory with a bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s, while the Core i7’s memory bus and bandwidth are not specified. ECC memory is available on the Xeon but not on the Core i7. The Xeon also has PCIe Gen 3 with 40 lanes (CPU only), while the Core i7’s PCIe configuration is not listed. Integrated graphics are present on the Core i7 as Radeon RX Vega M GH, while the Xeon has none. Market segments differ: Mobile for the Core i7, Server/Workstation for the Xeon. The Xeon has a launch MSRP of $2405, while the Core i7 has no launch MSRP listed. Production status is Active for the Core i7 and End-of-life for the Xeon. The Xeon also has a listed part number, SR26R, and a transistor count of 2,600 million with a die size of 356 mm², while the Core i7 has no such data. Both processors are multiplier-unlocked false, and both are from Intel.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is generational. The Core i7-8809G is built on Kaby Lake, specifically the Kaby Lake G codename, using a 14 nm process node. The Xeon E5-4648 v3 is based on Haswell, with the codename Haswell-EP, on a 22 nm process node. The foundry is Intel for both, but the transistor and die data are only available for the Xeon: 2,600 million transistors and a die size of 356 mm². The Core i7’s transistor count and die size are not recorded.

The Core i7-8809G’s generation is listed as Core i7 (Kaby Lake-G), while the Xeon’s generation is Xeon E5 (Haswell-EP). This reflects the different design goals: the Core i7 is a mobile part with a focus on power efficiency and integrated graphics, while the Xeon is a server processor optimized for multi-threading and reliability. The Xeon’s 30 MB L3 cache is a direct consequence of its 12-core design, and its quad-channel memory controller with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth supports high-demand server workloads. The Core i7’s 8 MB L3 cache is more modest, aligning with its 4-core configuration.

The Xeon’s 22 nm process node is older than the Core i7’s 14 nm node, yet the Xeon still manages to outperform the Core i7 in all Cinebench tests. This is largely due to the core count difference: 12 cores versus 4 cores. The Xeon’s lower clock speeds, with a base of 1700.00 MHz and a boost of 2.20 GHz, are compensated by the sheer number of cores and threads. The Core i7’s higher clocks, 3.10 GHz base and 4.20 GHz boost, help it remain competitive in single-threaded tests, but the Xeon still edges ahead by 6.4 to 6.8 percent in those metrics.

The integrated graphics on the Core i7, Radeon RX Vega M GH, is a defining feature that the Xeon lacks entirely. This makes the Core i7 a viable option for compact systems requiring GPU acceleration without a discrete card. The Xeon, with no integrated graphics, requires a separate GPU for any display output. ECC memory support on the Xeon is another critical differentiator, as it provides error correction for long-running server applications.

The production statuses tell a story of lifecycle timing. The Core i7-8809G, released on 2018-01-31, is still Active. The Xeon E5-4648 v3, released on 2015-05-31, is End-of-life. The Xeon’s launch MSRP of $2405 places it in a premium server segment, while the Core i7 has no listed launch MSRP. The Xeon’s part number, SR26R, is a specific identifier, while the Core i7 has no part number listed. Both processors are not multiplier-unlocked, meaning they are locked for overclocking.

In terms of memory, both support DDR4, but the Xeon’s quad-channel configuration with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth is far more robust than the Core i7’s unspecified memory bus. The Xeon’s PCIe Gen 3 with 40 lanes (CPU only) provides substantial expansion capability, while the Core i7’s PCIe details are absent. The socket difference, BGA 2270 versus Socket 2011-3, makes them physically incompatible, reinforcing their distinct target platforms.

The benchmark data shows that the Xeon’s architectural age does not hinder its performance in Cinebench. Its 12-core, 24-thread design, combined with 30 MB of L3 cache, delivers a consistent 6.7 percent advantage in multi-core tests and a smaller but still positive 6.4 to 6.8 percent edge in single-core tests. The Core i7-8809G, despite its newer 14 nm process and higher clock speeds, cannot overcome the core deficit in these workloads. The Xeon’s percentile ranking of 47 versus the Core i7’s 48 indicates they are nearly equivalent in the overall CPU population, but the Xeon’s wins in direct comparisons make it the stronger choice for heavily threaded server tasks. The Core i7’s integrated graphics and lower TDP, however, give it a distinct edge in mobile and all-in-one systems where power and space are limited.