CPU Comparison

# Intel Xeon E5640 vs Intel Processor N97

The Intel Xeon E5640 and Intel Processor N97 represent two very different eras of Intel silicon, separated by nearly thirteen years of architecture evolution. The Xeon E5640 is a 2010-era server/workstation part built on Westmere-EP, while the N97 is a 2023 mobile processor using the Gracemont efficiency cores. Despite the generational gap, both land at the 32nd percentile in the global CPU benchmark distribution, with average benchmark scores of 1137 and 1132 respectively, a difference of less than half a percent. The head-to-head results tell a more nuanced story: the N97 wins two of three Cinebench comparisons, but the Xeon takes the most decisive victory in the multi-core R23 test.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Xeon E5640 edges out the Intel Processor N97 with an average benchmark score of 1137 versus 1132, a margin of 0.4%. Both sit at the 32nd percentile of all CPUs, meaning they perform at a nearly identical overall level.

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

A: The Intel Xeon E5640 wins the R23 multi-core test with a score of 3303, beating the N97's 2913, a 13.4% advantage. This is the Xeon's sole head-to-head victory, and it is a substantial one.

Q: What is the single-core performance difference in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Processor N97 dominates the single-core R23 test, scoring 973 versus the Xeon E5640's 466. This represents a 52.1% lead for the N97, which is the largest performance gap in either direction across all benchmark comparisons.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Xeon E5640 supports ECC memory, consistent with its server/workstation market segment. The Intel Processor N97 does not support ECC, which reflects its mobile-oriented positioning.

Q: What are the production statuses of these two processors?

A: The Intel Xeon E5640 is end-of-life, having been released in March 2010. The Intel Processor N97 is an active product, released in January 2023, and remains in production.

Q: How do the memory configurations differ between the two chips?

A: The Xeon E5640 uses DDR3 memory with a triple-channel bus, while the N97 supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with a single-channel bus. The N97 has a specified memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, whereas the Xeon's memory bandwidth is not listed in the data.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two parts is significant. The Xeon E5640 is built on Intel's Westmere-EP, a 32 nm process with 1,170 million transistors on a 239 mm² die. The N97 uses the Gracemont architecture on a 10 nm process, though its transistor count and die size are not provided in the data. The Xeon belongs to the Westmere generation, while the N97 is part of the Alder Lake-N family under the Intel Processor branding.

Core and thread counts differ in a critical way: both have 4 physical cores, but the Xeon E5640 supports 8 threads via Hyper-Threading, while the N97 has no multi-threading and runs 4 threads. This explains why the older Xeon can still win a multi-core benchmark despite its much lower clock speeds. The Xeon's base clock is 2.67 GHz with a boost of 2.93 GHz, whereas the N97 starts at 2.00 GHz but boosts to 3.60 GHz, a full 0.67 GHz higher peak.

Cache hierarchies are organized differently as well. The Xeon E5640 has 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, plus a large 12 MB shared L3 cache. The N97 has 96 KB of L1 per core and a 2 MB shared L2, but only 6 MB of shared L3, half the Xeon's L3 capacity. The N97 compensates with a per-core L1 that is 50% larger, reflecting the efficiency-focused Gracemont design.

Memory support and I/O capabilities diverge sharply. The Xeon E5640 uses DDR3 with a triple-channel memory bus and ECC support, while the N97 supports DDR4 and DDR5 but with a single-channel bus and no ECC. The N97 explicitly lists 38.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth, and it offers PCIe Gen 3 with 9 CPU lanes. The Xeon is limited to PCIe Gen 2, with lane count not specified. The N97 also integrates UHD Graphics 730, whereas the Xeon has no integrated graphics, a key differentiator for systems without discrete GPUs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The three head-to-head Cinebench comparisons reveal a pattern: the N97 wins where single-thread performance or lightly-threaded scaling matters, while the Xeon wins in a heavily multi-threaded workload.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Intel Processor N97 scores 479 against the Xeon E5640's 332. That is a 30.7% advantage for the N97, a decisive margin that cannot be attributed to minor architectural tweaks. The N97's higher boost clock and more modern execution engine clearly carry the day in this test, which is less demanding on sustained multi-threaded throughput.

The Cinebench R23 multi-core test flips the result. Here, the Xeon E5640 scores 3303, which is 13.4% higher than the N97's 2913. This is the Xeon's only head-to-head win, and it is significant. The likely drivers are the Xeon's 8 threads versus 4, its larger 12 MB L3 cache, and its triple-channel memory interface. The R23 workload is more sustained and memory-intensive, allowing the older chip's server-grade architecture to overcome its clock speed deficit.

Single-core performance is where the N97 runs away with the comparison. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the N97 scores 973, more than double the Xeon's 466. The 52.1% delta is the largest in any test, and it aligns with the raw clock speed advantage (3.60 GHz vs 2.93 GHz boost) and the generational IPC improvements from Westmere to Gracemont. A 13-year architectural gap in single-thread efficiency is exactly what this result captures.

Across the three tests, the Intel Processor N97 wins two and the Xeon E5640 wins one. But the margins tell a more complex story: the N97's wins are by 30.7% and 52.1%, while the Xeon's win is by 13.4%. The average benchmark scores, however, nearly cancel out, 1137 for the Xeon and 1132 for the N97, indicating that the overall performance envelope is comparable, just distributed very differently across workload types.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every specification field. Here is a side-by-side account of the differences:

• Threads: The Xeon E5640 has 8 threads; the N97 has 4.
• Base Clock: The Xeon runs at 2.67 GHz; the N97 at 2.00 GHz.
• Boost Clock: The Xeon boosts to 2.93 GHz; the N97 to 3.60 GHz.
• TDP: The Xeon is rated at 80 W; the N97 at 12 W, a 68 W gap that reflects the N97's mobile efficiency focus.
• Socket: The Xeon uses Intel Socket 1366; the N97 uses Intel BGA 1264.
• Architecture/Codename: The Xeon is Westmere-EP (Westmere); the N97 is Gracemont.
• Process Node: The Xeon is 32 nm; the N97 is 10 nm.
• Transistors: The Xeon has 1,170 million; the N97's count is not listed.
• Die Size: The Xeon measures 239 mm²; the N97's is not listed.
• L1 Cache: The Xeon has 64 KB per core; the N97 has 96 KB per core.
• L2 Cache: The Xeon has 256 KB per core; the N97 has 2 MB shared.
• L3 Cache: The Xeon has 12 MB shared; the N97 has 6 MB shared.
• Memory Support: The Xeon supports DDR3; the N97 supports DDR4 and DDR5.
• Memory Bus: The Xeon is triple-channel; the N97 is single-channel.
• Memory Bandwidth: The N97 lists 38.4 GB/s; the Xeon has no listed value.
• ECC Memory: Supported on the Xeon; not supported on the N97.
• PCIe: The Xeon is Gen 2; the N97 is Gen 3 with 9 lanes (CPU only).
• Integrated Graphics: The Xeon has none; the N97 has UHD Graphics 730.
• Market Segment: The Xeon is Server/Workstation; the N97 is Mobile.
• Production Status: The Xeon is end-of-life; the N97 is active.
• Release Date: The Xeon launched March 2010; the N97 launched January 2023.
• Part Number: The Xeon is SLBVC; the N97 is SRMLM.

Both processors have locked multipliers, and neither has a launch MSRP listed in the data.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear division of use cases. The Intel Xeon E5640 is the pick for sustained multi-threaded workloads that can leverage its 8 threads, 12 MB L3 cache, and triple-channel DDR3 memory. Its 13.4% win in Cinebench R23 multi-core over a processor released thirteen years later reflects the value of thread count and large caches in heavily parallel rendering tasks. The Xeon also carries ECC memory support and a server/workstation pedigree, making it suitable for reliability-sensitive environments where data integrity is paramount.

The Intel Processor N97 is the choice for single-threaded performance and energy efficiency. Its 52.1% lead in R23 single-core is overwhelming, and its 30.7% win in R15 multi-core shows that it can also handle moderately threaded workloads. The 12 W TDP versus 80 W is a six-fold power reduction, and the integrated UHD Graphics 730 eliminates the need for a discrete GPU in basic systems. Its support for DDR4 and DDR5 with 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth, plus PCIe Gen 3, makes it a more modern platform for everyday computing and light productivity.

Benchmark results indicate that neither chip is a universal winner. The Xeon's average score of 1137 is nominally higher, but the N97's 1132 is within rounding error of a tie. The deciding factor should be workload shape: multi-threaded rendering and ECC requirements point to the Xeon E5640; single-thread responsiveness and low power consumption point to the N97. For a mobile or compact system where the integrated graphics and modern memory support are assets, the N97 is the clear choice. For a workstation-style build where sustained parallel throughput and memory reliability are non-negotiable, the Xeon remains competitive despite its age. The overall percentile parity, both at 32, reinforces that these are equally matched processors that excel in different domains.