Intel Core i7-980X vs Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data for these two processors is unusually one-sided. Across all six Cinebench tests in the database, the Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 wins every single comparison. The margins are consistent but modest, ranging from 1.9% to 2.4%. There is no test in which the older Core i7-980X takes the lead.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 595 against the i7-980X’s 584, a 1.9% advantage. The single-core result in R15 shows the Xeon at 84 versus 82, a 2.4% gap, which is the largest margin recorded in this head-to-head. Moving to Cinebench R20, the Xeon posts 2482 in multi-core and 350 in single-core, while the i7-980X manages 2434 and 343 respectively. That works out to a 2% lead in both tests.

Cinebench R23 follows the same pattern. The Xeon achieves 5910 in multi-core, 1.9% ahead of the i7-980X’s 5797. In single-core, the Xeon scores 834 versus 818, another 2% edge. The database also lists a Geekbench multi-core score of 3247 and a single-core score of 659 for the i7-980X, but no equivalent Geekbench results are recorded for the Xeon, so those figures cannot be used for a direct comparison.

The average benchmark score tells a slightly different story. The Xeon has an average score of 1709, while the i7-980X averages 1746. That places the i7-980X at the 41st percentile of all CPUs in the database, one point above the Xeon’s 40th percentile. The nearest rivals for the Xeon include the Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4 at an identical 1709, the Intel Core i7-990X at 1713 (0.2% higher), and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U at 1715 (0.4% higher). For the i7-980X, the closest competitors are the Intel Core i5-8269U at 1748 (0.1% higher), the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 3200GE at 1750 (0.2% higher), and the Intel Core i5-6600 at 1744 (0.1% lower).

The head-to-head results show the Xeon winning six tests and the i7-980X winning none. Yet the aggregate average score favors the i7-980X. This is because the i7-980X has additional Geekbench results in its record, which pull its average upward. The Cinebench-specific data, which is the only common ground between the two, consistently favors the Xeon.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear but narrow victory for the Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 in raw Cinebench performance. Every recorded multi-core and single-core test shows the Xeon ahead by roughly 2%. That is not a transformative margin, but it is consistent across three generations of Cinebench, R15, R20, and R23. If the workload is Cinebench or similar rendering tasks, the Xeon is the safer pick.

The Intel Core i7-980X is not without merit. Its average benchmark score of 1746 is higher than the Xeon’s 1709, and it sits at a higher percentile ranking. That average, however, includes Geekbench results that are not available for the Xeon. The head-to-head Cinebench data, where both CPUs are measured on identical tests, shows the i7-980X trailing in every instance.

The i7-980X does bring more cores, 6 against the Xeon’s 4, and more threads, 12 against 8. It also has an unlocked multiplier, which the Xeon lacks. For users who plan to overclock, the i7-980X is the only one of the two that allows it. The Xeon’s locked multiplier means its 3.50 GHz base and 3.60 GHz boost are the maximum stock settings, no manual tuning allowed.

The socket situation is a deciding factor for anyone building a new system. The Xeon uses Intel Socket 2011-3 with DDR4 memory and Gen 3 PCIe with 40 CPU lanes. The i7-980X uses the older Intel Socket 1366 with DDR3 memory and Gen 2 PCIe. The platform around each CPU is fundamentally different in era and capability. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, which the i7-980X does not. For workstation reliability, the Xeon has the edge.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 wins in every benchmark test recorded for both CPUs. It posts higher scores in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both multi-core and single-core. The margins sit between 1.9% and 2.4%, so the Xeon is consistently the faster chip in rendering workloads. The Xeon also wins in platform modernity, with DDR4 memory support, quad-channel memory bus, 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, and ECC memory capability. Its 22 nm process node is smaller than the i7-980X’s 32 nm node, which contributes to efficiency and transistor density.

The Intel Core i7-980X wins in aggregate average score, 1746 versus 1709, and in percentile ranking, 41st versus 40th. That is partly due to the extra Geekbench data in its record. The i7-980X also wins on core count, offering 6 cores and 12 threads against the Xeon’s 4 cores and 8 threads. It has a larger shared L3 cache, 12 MB versus 10 MB. It features an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking. Its TDP is lower at 130 watts, compared to the Xeon’s 140 watts. The i7-980X also has a higher transistor count per die area in terms of total die size efficiency, though the Xeon has more transistors overall at 2,600 million versus 1,170 million.

The i7-980X is a desktop part with a longer history in enthusiast builds. The Xeon is a server and workstation part, designed for stability and ECC memory support. The data shows the Xeon is faster in the common Cinebench tests, but the i7-980X offers more cores and overclocking headroom.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 scores 5910, while the Intel Core i7-980X scores 5797. The Xeon leads by 1.9%.

Q: Does the Intel Core i7-980X beat the Xeon in any benchmark test?

A: No. In the recorded head-to-head data, the Xeon wins all six Cinebench tests. The i7-980X does not win a single test. However, its average benchmark score of 1746 is higher than the Xeon’s 1709, due to additional Geekbench results.

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i7-980X does not list ECC memory support.

Q: Can either CPU be overclocked?

A: The Intel Core i7-980X has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is possible. The Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 has a locked multiplier, meaning no overclocking.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each?

A: The Xeon has 4 cores and 8 threads. The i7-980X has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: Which CPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i7-980X has an average benchmark score of 1746, compared to the Xeon’s 1709. The i7-980X also sits at the 41st percentile versus the Xeon’s 40th.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural eras. The Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 is built on the Haswell architecture, specifically Haswell-EP, using a 22 nm process node. It contains 2,600 million transistors on a 356 mm² die. The Intel Core i7-980X uses the Westmere architecture, codenamed Gulftown, on a 32 nm process node. It has 1,170 million transistors on a 239 mm² die. The Xeon’s smaller node allows for more transistors packed into a larger die, which explains its higher transistor count.

Cache layouts also differ. Both CPUs have 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core. The Xeon has 10 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i7-980X has 12 MB of shared L3 cache. Despite having fewer cores, the Xeon has less total L3 cache. The i7-980X’s extra cores and larger L3 cache do not translate into a Cinebench win, which suggests the Xeon’s newer architecture is more efficient per core.

Memory support is a major architectural split. The Xeon uses DDR4 memory with a quad-channel memory bus and a recorded memory bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s. The i7-980X uses DDR3 memory with a triple-channel memory bus, and no memory bandwidth figure is recorded in the database. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, while the i7-980X does not. For PCIe, the Xeon offers Gen 3 with 40 CPU lanes, while the i7-980X offers Gen 2 without a lane count listed.

The Xeon is classified as a server and workstation part, while the i7-980X is a desktop part. The Xeon’s release date is September 2014, while the i7-980X launched in March 2010. Both are end-of-life products. The Xeon’s part number is QGZYSR20P, and the i7-980X’s part number is SLBUZ.

Specification Differences

The Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Intel Core i7-980X has 6 cores and 12 threads. Base clock speeds differ slightly, with the Xeon at 3.50 GHz and the i7-980X at 3.33 GHz. Boost clocks are identical at 3.60 GHz for both.

Thermal design power differs by 10 watts. The Xeon is rated at 140 watts, while the i7-980X is rated at 130 watts. The socket is a major difference: the Xeon uses Intel Socket 2011-3, and the i7-980X uses Intel Socket 1366.

Memory support separates the two clearly. The Xeon supports DDR4 with a quad-channel memory bus and 68.3 GB/s bandwidth. The i7-980X supports DDR3 with a triple-channel memory bus and no recorded bandwidth. ECC memory is supported only on the Xeon.

PCIe generation differs as well. The Xeon has Gen 3 with 40 CPU lanes. The i7-980X has Gen 2, with no lane count specified. The Xeon has a locked multiplier, while the i7-980X has an unlocked multiplier.

Process node and foundry details also differ. The Xeon is built on a 22 nm process by Intel, with 2,600 million transistors and a 356 mm² die. The i7-980X is on a 32 nm process by Intel, with 1,170 million transistors and a 239 mm² die. The Xeon’s market segment is server and workstation, while the i7-980X is desktop. Release dates are September 2014 for the Xeon and March 2010 for the i7-980X. Both are end-of-life.