CPU Comparison

The Intel Xeon E-2276G and Intel Core i9-9980HK are both 14nm Coffee Lake parts, but they target different worlds: one is a socketed workstation CPU, the other a soldered mobile flagship. Despite the i9’s extra cores, benchmark data shows the Xeon winning seven of eight head-to-head tests, though the margin is often razor-thin. The i9 takes a single multi-core victory in Geekbench, while the Xeon dominates single-core workloads with a massive 15.9% lead in one test.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i9-9980HK has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Xeon E-2276G has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: How do the two chips compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core performance?

A: The Xeon E-2276G scores 11,957, edging out the i9-9980HK’s 11,836, a 1% difference. Despite having two fewer cores, the Xeon leads in this render test.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two in any benchmark?

A: The Xeon E-2276G wins Geekbench single-core by 15.9%, scoring 1,610 versus the i9-9980HK’s 1,389. This is the only double-digit delta in the entire head-to-head set.

Q: Where does the i9-9980HK actually win?

A: The i9-9980HK wins only Geekbench multi-core, scoring 6,687 versus the Xeon’s 6,551, a 2% advantage.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Xeon E-2276G supports ECC memory, while the Core i9-9980HK does not.

Q: What is the average benchmark score percentile for these CPUs?

A: Both chips sit at the 55th percentile against all CPUs. The Xeon E-2276G has an average benchmark score of 3,614, while the i9-9980HK averages 3,577.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on Intel’s 14nm process and share the Coffee Lake architecture, but they diverge in package and purpose. The Xeon E-2276G is part of the Xeon E-2200 series, uses the Coffee Lake-S WS codename, and fits the Intel Socket 1151. Its die size is 154 mm². In contrast, the i9-9980HK belongs to the Core i9 generation with the Coffee Lake-HR codename, is soldered to Intel BGA 1440, and has a slightly smaller die at 149 mm².

Core configuration is a major split. The Xeon packs 6 cores and 12 threads with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost of 4.90 GHz. The i9-9980HK offers 8 cores and 16 threads but starts at a much lower 2.40 GHz base, boosting to 5.00 GHz. Cache hierarchies also differ: both have 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core, but the shared L3 is 12 MB on the Xeon versus 16 MB on the i9.

Memory support is identical in bandwidth (42.7 GB/s, dual-channel DDR4), but ECC is exclusive to the Xeon. The i9-9980HK has no ECC support. PCIe connectivity differs, with the Xeon listing “Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only)” while the i9 simply lists “Gen 3.” Integrated graphics also differ: the Xeon uses HD Graphics P630, and the i9 uses UHD 630.

The i9-9980HK has an unlocked multiplier, making it overclockable, while the Xeon E-2276G is locked. Their production status is the same (end-of-life), and both were released in 2019, with the i9 arriving in April and the Xeon in May. The Xeon carries a launch MSRP of $362; the i9 has no listed launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data paints a clear picture of a narrow but consistent Xeon advantage in most workloads. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon E-2276G scores 1,205 against the i9-9980HK’s 1,193, a 1% win. Single-core in the same test goes to the Xeon at 169 versus 168, a 0.6% margin.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the pattern holds. Multi-core shows the Xeon at 5,021 and the i9 at 4,971, again a 1% gap. Single-core is 708 for the Xeon versus 701 for the i9, another 1% edge. Cinebench R23 repeats the result: the Xeon leads multi-core 11,957 to 11,836 (1%) and single-core 1,688 to 1,671 (1%).

Geekbench is where the story shifts. In multi-core, the i9-9980HK finally takes a win, scoring 6,687 against the Xeon’s 6,551, a 2% reversal. But the single-core Geekbench result is a blowout: the Xeon scores 1,610, beating the i9’s 1,389 by 15.9%. That single result accounts for most of the Xeon’s overall win tally.

Across all eight benchmarks, the Xeon E-2276G wins seven, with the i9-9980HK winning one. The Xeon’s average benchmark score is 3,614, slightly above the i9’s 3,577. Both sit in the 55th percentile of all CPUs, meaning despite the internal differences, they land in the same overall performance tier.

Specification Differences

The two chips differ on nearly every core specification. Core count is 6 for the Xeon versus 8 for the i9. Threads are 12 versus 16. Base clocks are 3.80 GHz versus 2.40 GHz, a 1.4 GHz difference in the Xeon’s favor. Boost clocks are closer: 4.90 GHz for the Xeon versus 5.00 GHz for the i9, a 0.10 GHz edge for the mobile part.

Thermal design power is a major differentiator. The Xeon E-2276G has an 80W TDP, while the i9-9980HK is rated at 45W. The i9 achieves its performance at a much lower thermal envelope, but it is also soldered to the motherboard via BGA 1440, whereas the Xeon uses the socketed LGA 1151.

Cache is another key difference. The Xeon has 12 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i9 has 16 MB. Both have identical per-core L1 (64 KB) and L2 (256 KB) caches. ECC memory support is present only on the Xeon. The i9 has an unlocked multiplier; the Xeon does not.

Integrated graphics differ: the Xeon uses HD Graphics P630, and the i9 uses UHD 630. PCIe configuration is stated as “Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only)” for the Xeon, while the i9 simply says “Gen 3.” The market segments are explicitly different: the Xeon is for Server/Workstation, and the i9 is for Mobile. The Xeon’s part number is SR3WS, and the i9’s is SRFD0.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon E-2276G is the clear winner for single-threaded performance. Its Geekbench single-core score of 1,610 versus the i9’s 1,389 gives it a decisive 15.9% advantage, and it also leads in every Cinebench single-core test (R15, R20, R23) by 0.6% to 1%. The higher base clock of 3.80 GHz likely drives this, making the Xeon the better choice for lightly threaded workloads that depend on raw clock speed.

The Xeon also wins all four Cinebench multi-core tests, despite having two fewer cores. Its multi-core scores are 1,205, 5,021, and 11,957 in R15, R20, and R23, respectively, each about 1% ahead of the i9. The Xeon’s higher sustained clock and desktop thermal headroom (80W TDP) help it outpace the mobile chip even with fewer physical cores. For rendering and CPU-bound workstation tasks, the data favors the Xeon.

The Intel Core i9-9980HK’s only benchmark victory is Geekbench multi-core, where it scores 6,687 versus the Xeon’s 6,551, a 2% lead. Its 8 cores and 16 threads, combined with 16 MB of L3 cache, give it an edge in this specific workload. The i9 also carries a 5.00 GHz boost clock, the highest of the two, and an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. For users needing a mobile platform with multi-core headroom and overclocking flexibility, the i9-9980HK is the stronger option.

In terms of platform features, the Xeon wins for workstation reliability with ECC memory support and a socketed design that allows for easier replacement or upgrades. The i9 is soldered, limiting its repairability. The Xeon’s 42.7 GB/s memory bandwidth matches the i9, but ECC is a feature the i9 simply cannot offer. The Xeon’s launch MSRP of $362 is the only price data available; the i9 has none.

Both processors are end-of-life and sit at the 55th percentile, but their average benchmark scores differ by only 37 points (3,614 versus 3,577). The Xeon’s win tally of 7 out of 8 benchmarks makes it the performance leader in this comparison, but the i9’s lower 45W TDP and mobile form factor mean it wins on efficiency and portability. The data supports the Xeon for fixed workstations and the i9 for high-end laptops where multi-core Geekbench performance and overclocking matter more than raw single-thread speed.