Intel Xeon D-1537 vs Intel Xeon E5-1630 v4 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E5-1630 v4 and Intel Xeon D-1537 are two Broadwell-era Intel parts that land in almost exactly the same place in the performance database despite being built for completely different jobs. The recorded Cinebench results show the E5-1630 v4 sweeping all six head-to-head tests, but every margin sits in the single digits, roughly two percent on the multi-core runs and one to two percent on the single-core runs. The real story is not the benchmark spread: it is that a quad-core workstation chip running at high clocks trades blows with an octa-core, low-power server chip, and the data reveals exactly where each design philosophy pays off.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Xeon E5-1630 v4 wins every recorded test, and it wins them narrowly. In Cinebench R15 multi-core the E5-1630 v4 scores 651 against 637 for the D-1537, a 2.2 percent advantage. Cinebench R20 multi-core goes the same way, 2714 to 2657, a 2.1 percent gap. Cinebench R23 multi-core repeats the pattern: 6464 versus 6327, again 2.2 percent in favor of the E5-1630 v4.

Single-core results follow suit. The E5-1630 v4 posts 91 in R15 single-core against 90, a 1.1 percent lead. In R20 single-core it scores 383 to 375, a 2.1 percent edge, and in R23 single-core it records 912 against 893, 2.1 percent clear. The final tally in the database is six wins for the E5-1630 v4 and zero for the D-1537.

The striking part is how those wins are achieved. The E5-1630 v4 has 4 cores and 8 threads; the D-1537 has 8 cores and 16 threads, double the hardware threads. Yet the multi-core scores are effectively tied. That tells you the E5-1630 v4's 4.00 GHz boost clock is carrying it past a chip with far more cores running at a 2.30 GHz boost. Conversely, the D-1537 achieving within roughly two percent in multi-core with a 35 W TDP against a 140 W TDP is the single most impressive number on this page.

Against the broader field, both chips sit in the 42nd percentile of all CPUs. The E5-1630 v4's average benchmark score is 1869, with nearest rivals including the Intel Core i3-9350K at 1867, the Intel Core i5-1035G4 at 1861, the Intel Xeon E3-1545M v5 at 1879, and the Intel Processor U300 at 1881, all within a fraction of a percent. The D-1537's average score of 1830 places it alongside the Intel Xeon E5-2608L v3, Intel Core i5-8305G, AMD Ryzen 5 4600U, and Intel Core i7-4790S, every one of them within 0.1 percent in the database. These are evenly matched neighbors.

The Verdict

For raw throughput in these rendering tests, the data says pick the E5-1630 v4: it wins all six recorded benchmarks. The margin is small, around two percent, but it is consistent across every Cinebench version and every core count scenario. If the workload is lightly threaded, the E5-1630 v4's higher single-core scores, 912 versus 893 in R23, make it the safer choice, and its 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes plus quad-channel DDR4 at 76.8 GB/s of bandwidth give it a substantially wider platform for add-in cards and memory-hungry tasks.

Pick the D-1537 when efficiency, density, and longevity matter more than peak speed. It delivers multi-core results within about two percent while operating at a quarter of the TDP, it doubles the core and thread count for workloads that scale beyond eight threads better than Cinebench does, and it carries an Active production status in the database while the E5-1630 v4 is End-of-life. Its BGA 1667 packaging targets compact server boards where a 140 W Socket 2011-3 chip simply cannot go. The trade-off is a narrower platform: dual-channel memory and 24 PCIe lanes versus 40.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Xeon E5-1630 v4, scoring 6464 against 6327 for the Xeon D-1537, a 2.2 percent advantage.

Q: How can an 8-core chip lose to a 4-core chip?

A: Clock speeds. The E5-1630 v4 boosts to 4.00 GHz on 4 cores and 8 threads, while the D-1537 runs 8 cores and 16 threads at up to 2.30 GHz. The extra cores nearly close the gap, but not quite, and the D-1537 does it at 35 W versus 140 W.

Q: Do these two CPUs support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both support ECC, which is recorded for each part in the database.

Q: Are both CPUs still in production?

A: No. The Xeon D-1537 is listed as Active, while the Xeon E5-1630 v4 is listed as End-of-life.

Q: Which CPU has more PCIe lanes?

A: The E5-1630 v4, with 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes (CPU only) versus 24 PCIe Gen 3 lanes on the D-1537.

Q: How do the two compare against the full database?

A: Both sit in the 42nd percentile of all CPUs. Their average benchmark scores are 1869 for the E5-1630 v4 and 1830 for the D-1537.

Specification Differences

The two chips diverge on nearly every practical spec. Core counts are 4 cores and 8 threads on the E5-1630 v4 versus 8 cores and 16 threads on the D-1537. The base clocks are 3.70 GHz versus 1700 MHz, and boost clocks are 4.00 GHz versus 2.30 GHz. TDP is the widest gap of all: 140 W for the E5-1630 v4 against 35 W for the D-1537.

Sockets differ completely: Intel Socket 2011-3 for the E5-1630 v4, Intel BGA 1667 for the D-1537, meaning the latter is soldered rather than socketed. Memory support is DDR4-only on the E5-1630 v4 across a quad-channel bus with 76.8 GB/s of bandwidth, while the D-1537 takes DDR3 or DDR4 on a dual-channel bus with no recorded bandwidth figure. PCIe is Gen 3 with 40 lanes on the E5-1630 v4 versus Gen 3 with 24 lanes on the D-1537.

Market segments also split: the E5-1630 v4 is classified as Desktop, the D-1537 as Server/Workstation. Production status favors the D-1537 (Active versus End-of-life). Release dates were 2016-06-19 for the E5-1630 v4 and 2015-10-31 for the D-1537. Launch MSRP was $406 for the E5-1630 v4 and $470 for the D-1537. Transistor counts are 3,400 million versus 3,200 million, part numbers SR2PF versus SR2GF, and neither has integrated graphics or an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

Both chips come from Intel's Broadwell architecture on a 14 nm process at Intel's own foundries, and both share a 246 mm² die size. From there the designs split along their codenames: the E5-1630 v4 is Broadwell-EP in the Xeon E5 generation, while the D-1537 is plain Broadwell in the Xeon D generation, targeting dense, low-power server deployments.

Cache layouts differ meaningfully. The E5-1630 v4 carries a 10 MB shared L3 across its 4 cores, plus 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core. The D-1537 uses a per-core L3 scheme, 1.5 MB per core across 8 cores, with the same 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core. A large shared pool favors the fewer, faster cores of the EP design; a distributed per-core L3 suits the wider, lower-clocked D-1537.

The memory subsystems underline the architectural intent. Quad-channel DDR4 with 76.8 GB/s of recorded bandwidth on the E5-1630 v4 is workstation-class feeding for high-clock cores, while the D-1537's dual-channel DDR3/DDR4 flexibility and BGA packaging reflect its role as an integrated, efficiency-first server SoC. Both retain ECC support, the defining Xeon feature shared across the two branches.

Where Each One Wins

The E5-1630 v4 wins every scenario the recorded benchmarks measure. It is ahead in single-core work at every Cinebench version, 91 to 90 in R15, 383 to 375 in R20, and 912 to 893 in R23, so lightly threaded applications and latency-sensitive tasks favor it. It also leads every multi-core run despite half the cores, meaning clock-bound rendering and similar throughput workloads go its way too. Add 40 PCIe lanes and quad-channel bandwidth, and it is the pick for GPU-heavy or memory-bandwidth-hungry workstation builds on Socket 2011-3.

The D-1537 wins on the axes the benchmarks do not directly measure but the recorded specs make clear. Its 35 W TDP against 140 W makes it the only realistic option where power or cooling is constrained, and its 8 cores and 16 threads mean workloads that scale past the E5-1630 v4's 8 threads, such as heavily parallel server tasks, have headroom the quad-core chip lacks. Its Active production status versus End-of-life also matters for long-term platform planning. For dense, low-power server deployment, the data points to the D-1537; for maximum per-thread speed and platform bandwidth, the E5-1630 v4.