Intel Xeon D-1540 vs Intel Xeon E5-1650 v3 Comparison

The recorded data paints a picture of two Intel server-class processors that land within a few percent of each other in raw compute, yet arrive there by very different routes. The Intel Xeon E5-1650 v3 sweeps all six Cinebench contests in the head-to-head set, but its margins are narrow: between 3.2 and 3.3 percent in every test. The Intel Xeon D-1540 answers with twice the threaded hardware and a far tighter thermal envelope, which is exactly why this comparison is more interesting than the win column alone suggests.

Where Each One Wins

The E5-1650 v3 wins every benchmark in the database, and it wins them in both single-core and multi-core modes. That is the notable part: a six-core, twelve-thread part out-rendering an eight-core, sixteen-thread rival by 3.2 percent in Cinebench R23 multi-core (8800 versus 8531) comes down to clock speed. Its 3.50 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost sit well above the D-1540's 2000 MHz base and 2.60 GHz boost, and the single-core scores confirm it: 125 versus 121 in R15, 521 versus 505 in R20, and 1242 versus 1204 in R23.

The D-1540's case rests on efficiency and platform characteristics rather than benchmark wins. Its 45 W TDP is dramatically lower than the E5-1650 v3's 140 W, and it remains an active product while the Haswell-EP chip is end-of-life. For throughput-oriented deployments where per-thread latency matters less than sustained operation under tight power and cooling constraints, more threads at lower clocks is a defensible trade even at a 3 percent benchmark deficit. Note also that the D-1540's rival cluster (Core i3-12100TE, Core i5-8600, Core i3-1125G4, Xeon D-1541, all within roughly a percent of its 2467 average score) sits almost entirely in mobile and efficiency-focused territory, which reflects how the database positions this chip.

Architecture Differences

The two processors belong to adjacent Intel generations but different design philosophies. The E5-1650 v3 is Haswell-EP, built on Intel's 22 nm process, with 2,600 million transistors spread across a 356 mm² die. The D-1540 is Broadwell on a 14 nm node, packing 3,200 million transistors into a smaller 246 mm² die. The newer, denser node is a large part of how the D-1540 fits eight cores inside a 45 W envelope that the E5-1650 v3 burns 140 W to feed six.

Cache organization differs meaningfully. The E5-1650 v3 carries 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core plus a large 15 MB shared L3. The D-1540 matches the per-core L1 and L2 figures but distributes its L3 as 1.5 MB per core, which works out to a comparable aggregate given its core count. Both support ECC memory, and neither offers integrated graphics.

Memory and I/O diverge sharply. The E5-1650 v3 is a DDR4-only part with a quad-channel bus and 68.3 GB/s of memory bandwidth, plus 40 PCIe 3.0 lanes from the CPU. The D-1540 is more flexible on memory type (DDR3 and DDR4) but narrower, with a dual-channel bus, no recorded bandwidth figure, and 24 PCIe 3.0 lanes. The E5-1650 v3 also has an unlocked multiplier; the D-1540 does not.

Sockets tell the rest of the story. The E5-1650 v3 uses Socket 2011-3, a replaceable workstation-class package. The D-1540 is soldered onto BGA 1667, reinforcing its role as a fixed, compact server building block. Its launch MSRP was $581.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Every contest in the database went the same way, by nearly the same margin:

| Test | E5-1650 v3 | D-1540 | Delta |

|---|---|---|---|

| Cinebench R15 Multi | 887 | 859 | 3.3% |

| Cinebench R15 Single | 125 | 121 | 3.3% |

| Cinebench R20 Multi | 3696 | 3583 | 3.2% |

| Cinebench R20 Single | 521 | 505 | 3.2% |

| Cinebench R23 Multi | 8800 | 8531 | 3.2% |

| Cinebench R23 Single | 1242 | 1204 | 3.2% |

The uniformity across three Cinebench generations is the key observation. Multi-core and single-core deltas are effectively identical, which means the E5-1650 v3's advantage is almost purely a frequency effect rather than an architectural one: six cores at up to 3.80 GHz trade blows with eight cores at up to 2.60 GHz and come out slightly ahead. Had the D-1540 matched the Haswell part's clocks, its additional two cores and four threads would almost certainly have inverted the result.

Aggregate placement backs this up. The E5-1650 v3 averages 2545 across the database, good for the 49th percentile of all recorded CPUs, against 2467 and the 48th percentile for the D-1540. Their rival lists barely overlap: the E5-1650 v3 scores within 0.2 percent of the Xeon E5-4640 v3 (2550), 0.4 percent behind the Ryzen 7 4800HS (2557), 0.6 percent ahead of the Core i3-10325 (2530), and 0.7 percent ahead of the Xeon E-2244G (2527). The D-1540, meanwhile, trails the Core i3-12100TE (2475) by 0.3 percent and leads the Core i5-8600 (2454), Core i3-1125G4 (2451), and Xeon D-1541 (2447) by 0.5 to 0.8 percent. Two chips one percentile apart, drawing neighbors from entirely different product families.

The Verdict

On pure benchmark data, the E5-1650 v3 is the faster processor in every measurable workload: six wins from six, a 3.2 to 3.3 percent lead in each, higher average score, and one percentile higher against the full database. It is also the better-connected chip, with quad-channel DDR4 at 68.3 GB/s and 40 PCIe lanes versus 24, which matters for expansion-heavy workstation duties.

The data argues for the D-1540 on three grounds. First, efficiency: comparable aggregate performance from a 45 W envelope against 140 W is an exceptional performance-per-watt position. Second, threaded headroom: sixteen threads against twelve benefits workloads that scale past what Cinebench measures. Third, lifecycle: it is an active product, while the E5-1650 v3 is end-of-life.

For a rendering or single-thread-sensitive workstation role where sockets and cooling are not constraints, the E5-1650 v3 is the pick the numbers support. For dense, power-limited, or long-lifecycle deployments, the D-1540 delivers nearly identical scores in a dramatically leaner package. Neither is a performance bargain over the other: 3 percent is within the range where platform features should decide.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in benchmarks?

A: The Xeon E5-1650 v3 wins all six recorded Cinebench tests, by 3.2 to 3.3 percent in each, including 8800 versus 8531 in Cinebench R23 multi-core.

Q: How much more power does the E5-1650 v3 use?

A: Its TDP is 140 W against 45 W for the Xeon D-1540, despite the D-1540 having two more cores and four more threads.

Q: Which has more cores and threads?

A: The D-1540 has 8 cores and 16 threads; the E5-1650 v3 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The E5-1650 v3 still out-scores it thanks to much higher clock speeds (3.80 GHz boost versus 2.60 GHz).

Q: Which has better memory support?

A: The E5-1650 v3 offers quad-channel DDR4 at 68.3 GB/s. The D-1540 supports both DDR3 and DDR4 but only dual-channel, with 24 PCIe lanes versus 40.

Q: Are both CPUs still in production?

A: No. The E5-1650 v3 is end-of-life; the D-1540 is listed as active.

Q: Can either CPU be overclocked?

A: The E5-1650 v3 has an unlocked multiplier. The D-1540 does not.