Intel Core i9-10980HK vs Intel Xeon Silver 4116 Comparison

The Intel Xeon Silver 4116 and the Intel Core i9-10980HK are two very different processors that end up delivering remarkably similar benchmark results. The Xeon Silver 4116 is a 12-core, 24-thread server/workstation chip built for the Socket 3647 platform, while the Core i9-10980HK is an 8-core, 16-thread mobile processor with an unlocked multiplier and integrated graphics. Despite these architectural divides, the benchmark data shows the Xeon Silver 4116 narrowly outperforming the Core i9-10980HK in every single Cinebench test, with winning margins ranging from 0.5% to 0.8%. The data suggests that for users who need a high-core-count processor for a server or workstation, the Xeon Silver 4116 offers a slight performance edge, while the Core i9-10980HK is the choice for a mobile platform that requires a boost clock of 5.30 and a lower 45 W TDP.

The Verdict

The benchmark results place these two chips in the same performance tier, with the Xeon Silver 4116 taking a clean sweep of all six head-to-head Cinebench tests. The Xeon Silver 4116 wins the Cinebench R15 multicore test with a score of 1301 versus 1291, a 0.8% advantage. In the single-core R15 test, it wins 183 to 182, a 0.5% margin. This pattern continues across the R20 and R23 suites, where the Xeon Silver 4116 leads by 0.7% and 0.8% in the respective multicore and single-core tests. The average benchmark score for the Xeon Silver 4116 is 3733, while the Core i9-10980HK sits slightly lower at 3706, a difference that places them both at the 56th percentile of all CPUs.

Given this data, the choice between the two comes down to platform rather than pure performance. The Xeon Silver 4116 is the processor for a system built around the Intel Socket 3647 platform with ECC memory support, making it suitable for server or workstation workloads where reliability is paramount. The Core i9-10980HK, with its 45 W TDP and integrated UHD Graphics, is designed for a mobile form factor, and its unlocked multiplier suggests it is intended for users who want to overclock. The data shows that the Xeon Silver 4116 is the better performer in a head-to-head comparison, but the Core i9-10980HK is the only one of the two that offers integrated graphics and a mobile socket, making it the practical choice for a laptop. The Xeon Silver 4116’s 12 cores and 24 threads give it a theoretical advantage in heavily threaded workloads, yet its 3.00 boost clock is significantly lower than the Core i9-10980HK’s 5.30, which explains why the performance gap remains so small.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on distinctly different architectures despite both using a 14 nm process node from Intel. The Xeon Silver 4116 is based on the Skylake-SP architecture, with the codename Skylake-SP, and is part of the Xeon Silver generation. It features 12 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 2.10 and a boost clock of 3.00. Its cache layout includes 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and a shared 16.5 MB of L3 cache. The chip is designed for the Intel Socket 3647 platform and supports ECC memory, which is a critical feature for error-correcting workloads in server environments.

The Core i9-10980HK, in contrast, is built on the Comet Lake architecture, with the codename Comet Lake-H, and is part of the Core 10th Gen series. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.40 and a much higher boost clock of 5.30. Its cache configuration is different: it has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The L2 cache per core is notably smaller than the Xeon Silver 4116’s 1 MB per core. The Core i9-10980HK uses the Intel BGA 1440 socket, is a mobile processor, and does not support ECC memory. It also includes integrated UHD Graphics, a feature absent from the Xeon Silver 4116, and its PCIe configuration is Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU only. The Xeon Silver 4116’s transistor count is listed as 8,000 million, while the Core i9-10980HK’s transistor count is not provided. The Xeon Silver 4116 was released in 2017, while the Core i9-10980HK came later in 2020 and is marked as end-of-life.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon Silver 4116 has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core i9-10980HK has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What is the maximum boost clock for each processor?

A: The Intel Xeon Silver 4116 has a boost clock of 3.00, while the Intel Core i9-10980HK has a boost clock of 5.30.

Q: Does the Core i9-10980HK support ECC memory?

A: No, the Core i9-10980HK does not support ECC memory, whereas the Xeon Silver 4116 does support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor offers integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core i9-10980HK includes integrated UHD Graphics, while the Intel Xeon Silver 4116 does not list any integrated graphics.

Q: What are the TDP values for these two chips?

A: The Intel Xeon Silver 4116 has a TDP of 85, and the Intel Core i9-10980HK has a TDP of 45, indicating the mobile chip is designed for lower power consumption.

Q: How do the two processors compare in average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Xeon Silver 4116 has an average benchmark score of 3733, while the Intel Core i9-10980HK has an average benchmark score of 3706, placing them both at the 56th percentile.

Specification Differences

The primary specification differences between the Intel Xeon Silver 4116 and the Intel Core i9-10980HK are substantial. The Xeon Silver 4116 has 12 cores and 24 threads, whereas the Core i9-10980HK has 8 cores and 16 threads. The base clocks differ: the Xeon Silver 4116 runs at 2.10, while the Core i9-10980HK runs at 2.40. The boost clocks are far apart, with the Xeon Silver 4116 at 3.00 and the Core i9-10980HK at 5.30. The TDP also differs significantly, with the Xeon Silver 4116 at 85 and the Core i9-10980HK at 45. The sockets are different, with the Xeon Silver 4116 using Intel Socket 3647 and the Core i9-10980HK using Intel BGA 1440. The cache structures diverge, as the Xeon Silver 4116 has 1 MB of L2 cache per core and 16.5 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core i9-10980HK has 256 KB of L2 cache per core and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. ECC memory support is present on the Xeon Silver 4116 but absent on the Core i9-10980HK. The Core i9-10980HK features integrated UHD Graphics and a Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) PCIe configuration, while the Xeon Silver 4116 does not list integrated graphics or PCIe details. The multiplier is unlocked on the Core i9-10980HK but locked on the Xeon Silver 4116. The market segments differ, with the Xeon Silver 4116 categorized as Server/Workstation and the Core i9-10980HK as Mobile. The Core i9-10980HK has a launch MSRP of $643, while the Xeon Silver 4116 has no listed launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark results are consistent across the board, with the Intel Xeon Silver 4116 winning all six tests against the Intel Core i9-10980HK. In the Cinebench R15 multicore test, the Xeon Silver 4116 scores 1301 against the Core i9-10980HK’s 1291, a 0.8% win. The single-core R15 test is closer, with the Xeon Silver 4116 scoring 183 and the Core i9-10980HK scoring 182, a 0.5% margin. Moving to Cinebench R20, the Xeon Silver 4116 scores 5421 in multicore, while the Core i9-10980HK scores 5381, giving the Xeon a 0.7% advantage. In the R20 single-core test, the Xeon Silver 4116 scores 765 against 759, a 0.8% win. The Cinebench R23 multicore results show the Xeon Silver 4116 at 12908 and the Core i9-10980HK at 12812, a 0.7% lead. Finally, in the R23 single-core test, the Xeon Silver 4116 scores 1822 versus 1808, another 0.8% win.

These margins are tight, but the pattern is clear. The Xeon Silver 4116’s extra 4 cores and 8 threads give it an edge in multicore workloads, yet the Core i9-10980HK’s higher boost clock of 5.30 helps it stay competitive in single-core tests, where its 1808 R23 score is only 14 points behind the Xeon’s 1822. The data shows that the Xeon Silver 4116’s 12-core configuration provides a consistent, if modest, performance advantage across all rendering workloads. The Core i9-10980HK, despite having fewer cores, manages to keep the deficit under 1% in every test, which speaks to the efficiency of its higher clock speeds. For users relying on Cinebench scores to gauge performance, the Xeon Silver 4116 is the winner, but the practical difference in real-world usage would likely be imperceptible given the sub-1% margins.