Intel Xeon D-1548 vs Intel Xeon E5-2629 v3 Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded benchmark data presents a clear picture: the Intel Xeon E5-2629 v3 wins all six head-to-head Cinebench comparisons against the Intel Xeon D-1548. The margin is consistent, ranging from 2.2% to 2.8% across single-core and multi-core tests. Neither processor escapes the 47th percentile in the database, meaning both sit squarely in the mid-range of all CPUs measured, but the E5-2629 v3 does so with a slightly higher average benchmark score of 2283 versus 2231 for the D-1548.

Who should pick which? The E5-2629 v3 is the choice for raw compute throughput. Its 2.40 GHz base clock and 3.20 GHz boost clock, combined with a quad-channel memory bus and 59.7 GB/s of memory bandwidth, make it the stronger option for multi-threaded server workloads that stress both the cores and the memory subsystem. The data shows it leads the D-1548 in every Cinebench iteration, from R15 through R23, and in both multicore and singlecore runs. For workloads that depend on sustained all-core performance, the E5-2629 v3 is the better fit.

The D-1548, however, is not without its own appeal. Its 45 W TDP is dramatically lower than the 85 W TDP of the E5-2629 v3, and it comes in a compact BGA 1667 package, which indicates a soldered, small-footprint design. The D-1548 also remains in active production status, while the E5-2629 v3 is end-of-life. For deployments where power efficiency, thermal envelope, and long-term availability matter more than a 2.3% performance edge, the D-1548 is the pragmatic selection. The data shows it trails by only 2.3% in multi-core R15, R20, and R23 tests, a gap that is measurable but modest for many server applications.

In short: choose the E5-2629 v3 for maximum compute performance and memory bandwidth. Choose the D-1548 for lower power draw, active production status, and a smaller physical footprint, accepting a small but consistent performance deficit.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core performance?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2629 v3 wins all three single-core Cinebench tests. It scores 112 in R15 single-core versus 109 for the D-1548, 467 in R20 versus 457, and 1114 in R23 versus 1089. The delta is 2.8% in R15 and 2.2% to 2.3% in R20 and R23.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap between these two chips?

A: The E5-2629 v3 leads by 2.3% in all three multi-core tests: 795 versus 777 in R15, 3315 versus 3239 in R20, and 7893 versus 7713 in R23. This consistency across test versions indicates a stable, architecture-level advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

Q: Are both processors compatible with the same memory configurations?

A: No. The E5-2629 v3 supports quad-channel memory and has a recorded bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The D-1548 uses a dual-channel memory bus, and the database does not record a bandwidth figure for it. Both support DDR3 and DDR4 memory and both support ECC, but the memory subsystem differs significantly.

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

A: The E5-2629 v3 is listed as end-of-life, while the D-1548 is in active production. This is a meaningful distinction for systems that require long-term supply or replacement availability.

Q: Which processor has the lower power consumption?

A: The D-1548 has a TDP of 45 W, compared to 85 W for the E5-2629 v3. This makes the D-1548 the more power-efficient option on paper, which is relevant for dense or thermally constrained deployments.

Q: How do these chips compare to their nearest rivals in the database?

A: The E5-2629 v3 has an average score of 2283, placing it within 0.9% of the Intel Core i5-10400H (2303) and 1.1% behind the Intel Core i7-8809G (2307). The D-1548 averages 2231, which is nearly identical to the Intel Xeon E5-4648 v3 (2227) and the Intel Core i7-5775C (2224), with deltas of 0.2% and 0.3% respectively.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel microarchitecture families. The E5-2629 v3 is built on Haswell-EP, the server variant of the Haswell architecture, while the D-1548 uses Broadwell, specifically the Broadwell-DE line. This generational split is visible in the process node: the E5-2629 v3 uses Intel's 22 nm process, while the D-1548 uses the newer 14 nm node. The die sizes reflect this too, with the E5-2629 v3 measuring 356 mm² and containing 2,600 million transistors, against 246 mm² and 3,200 million transistors for the D-1548. The newer node allows the D-1548 to pack more transistors into a smaller die, which contributes to its much lower 45 W TDP.

Cache layouts also diverge. Both chips share the same per-core L1 (64 KB) and L2 (256 KB) design, but the L3 differs. The E5-2629 v3 has 20 MB of shared L3 cache, a classic server configuration. The D-1548 instead provides 1.5 MB of L3 per core, which for an 8-core chip totals 12 MB, but structured as a distributed per-core allocation rather than a single shared pool. This architectural choice has implications for how data is shared across cores.

The memory controllers are equally distinct. The E5-2629 v3 supports quad-channel memory, yielding a recorded bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The D-1548 uses a dual-channel bus, and no bandwidth figure is recorded in the database. Both support DDR3 and DDR4 and both support ECC, but the quad-channel design of the E5-2629 v3 gives it a substantial theoretical memory throughput advantage.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The E5-2629 v3 provides 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU, while the D-1548 provides 24. This makes the E5-2629 v3 more suitable for systems with many expansion cards, NVMe drives, or high-bandwidth accelerators. The sockets are incompatible: the E5-2629 v3 uses Intel Socket 2011-3, a large LGA socket, while the D-1548 uses Intel BGA 1667, a ball-grid-array package that is soldered directly to the board.

The production statuses differ as well. The E5-2629 v3 is end-of-life, released in September 2014. The D-1548 is active, released in October 2015. The D-1548 also carries a launch MSRP of $555, while the E5-2629 v3 has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

Specification Differences

The E5-2629 v3 and D-1548 share the same core and thread counts, 8 cores and 16 threads, and both have locked multipliers. Both come from Intel, both are aimed at the server/workstation segment, and neither has integrated graphics. From there, the specifications diverge across nearly every other field.

Clock speeds favor the E5-2629 v3. It runs at a 2.40 GHz base clock and boosts to 3.20 GHz. The D-1548 has a base clock recorded as 2000.00 MHz, which is 2.00 GHz, and a boost clock of 2.60 GHz. The E5-2629 v3 therefore has a 400 MHz base-clock advantage and a 600 MHz boost-clock advantage.

TDP is a major differentiator. The E5-2629 v3 draws 85 W, while the D-1548 draws only 45 W. This 40 W difference is significant for power budgeting and cooling requirements.

The sockets are different, as noted: Socket 2011-3 for the E5-2629 v3, BGA 1667 for the D-1548. The process node differs (22 nm versus 14 nm), as do the transistor counts (2,600 million versus 3,200 million) and die sizes (356 mm² versus 246 mm²).

Memory bus width differs, with the E5-2629 v3 using quad-channel and the D-1548 using dual-channel. The E5-2629 v3 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s; the D-1548 has none recorded. PCIe lane counts differ: 40 versus 24, both Gen 3.

The L3 cache structure differs, as described above: 20 MB shared for the E5-2629 v3, 1.5 MB per core for the D-1548. Production status differs: end-of-life versus active. Release dates differ: September 2014 versus October 2015. Part numbers are SR1XY for the E5-2629 v3 and SR2DJ for the D-1548. The D-1548 has a launch MSRP of $555; the E5-2629 v3 has no launch MSRP recorded.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is unambiguous: the E5-2629 v3 wins all six recorded comparisons, with zero wins for the D-1548. The margins are small but consistent, which suggests a steady underlying advantage rather than a test-specific anomaly.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the E5-2629 v3 scores 795 against 777 for the D-1548, a 2.3% lead. The single-core R15 test shows a slightly larger gap: 112 versus 109, a 2.8% difference. This is the largest single margin in the entire comparison.

Cinebench R20 repeats the pattern. Multi-core sees the E5-2629 v3 at 3315 and the D-1548 at 3239, again a 2.3% advantage. Single-core shows 467 versus 457, a 2.2% gap.

Cinebench R23, the most recent test in the set, delivers the same story. Multi-core: 7893 for the E5-2629 v3, 7713 for the D-1548, a 2.3% lead. Single-core: 1114 versus 1089, a 2.3% lead.

The consistency across R15, R20, and R23 is notable. The multi-core delta stays at exactly 2.3% in all three versions, while the single-core delta ranges from 2.2% to 2.8%. This stability indicates that the E5-2629 v3's advantage is baked into its clock speeds and memory subsystem, not dependent on any particular workload or benchmark revision.

The average benchmark scores in the database reflect the same ordering. The E5-2629 v3 has an average score of 2283, placing it at the 47th percentile. The D-1548 averages 2231, also at the 47th percentile, but with a 2.3% deficit relative to its rival. The nearest rivals for the E5-2629 v3 are the Intel Xeon D-1557 (2282, 0% delta), the Intel Core i3-10305 (2264, 0.8% delta), the Intel Core i5-10400H (2303, -0.9% delta), and the Intel Core i7-8809G (2307, -1.1% delta). The D-1548's nearest rivals are the Intel Xeon E5-4648 v3 (2227, 0.2% delta), the Intel Xeon D-1715TER (2238, -0.3% delta), the Intel Core i7-8559U (2225, 0.3% delta), and the Intel Core i7-5775C (2224, 0.3% delta).

In practical terms, a 2.3% multi-core lead means the E5-2629 v3 completes the same batch of threaded work in slightly less time. For a render farm or a batch-processing server running many jobs, that edge compounds over thousands of tasks. For interactive or lightly threaded workloads, the single-core lead of 2.2% to 2.8% is similarly small but real. The D-1548 does not lose by a wide margin, but it loses everywhere, and the data offers no test where it pulls ahead.