Intel Xeon D-1715TER vs Intel Xeon E5-2629 v3 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E5-2629 v3 and Intel Xeon D-1715TER are both server-focused processors, yet they represent two very different design philosophies from Intel. The E5-2629 v3 is a legacy Haswell-EP part from late 2014, while the D-1715TER is a modern Ice Lake-D chip released in early 2022. Despite their generational gap and differing core counts, the benchmark data shows a remarkably tight race, with the older processor edging out the newer one across every single test in the Cinebench suite. This analysis will break down the data to show where each chip holds an advantage, how their specifications diverge, and which user should consider each part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data from the head-to-head comparisons is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon E5-2629 v3 wins all six benchmark tests, but the margins are consistently narrow. In the Cinebench R15 multicore test, the E5-2629 v3 scores 795 against 779 for the D-1715TER, a lead of 2.1%. This pattern continues in the single-core R15 test, where the E5-2629 v3 scores 112 versus 109, a slightly larger relative advantage of 2.8%.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the story remains the same. The E5-2629 v3 posts a multicore score of 3315, while the D-1715TER reaches 3249, resulting in a 2% delta. In the single-core R20 benchmark, the E5-2629 v3 again wins with 467 points against 458, another 2% margin. The trend holds steady in the most demanding test, Cinebench R23. The E5-2629 v3 achieves 7893 multicore and 1114 single-core, while the D-1715TER trails with 7738 and 1092 respectively, both showing a 2% delta.

The fact that the E5-2629 v3 wins every test confirms its raw thread count. With 8 cores and 16 threads, it has double the core and thread count of the D-1715TER, which has 4 cores and 8 threads. However, the D-1715TER's newer architecture and higher boost clock of 3.50 GHz (versus 3.20 GHz for the E5-2629 v3) allow it to keep the performance gap minimal. The average benchmark scores reflect this closeness: the E5-2629 v3 averages 2283, placing it in the 47th percentile of all CPUs, while the D-1715TER averages 2238, also in the 47th percentile.

Looking at their respective nearest rivals further contextualizes their performance. The E5-2629 v3 sits within a tight cluster of comparably performing chips, including the Intel Xeon D-1557, which scores an average of 2282 with a 0% delta, and the Intel Core i5-10400H, which scores 2303 with a -0.9% delta. The D-1715TER finds itself in a similar position, with the Intel Xeon D-1548 averaging 2231 (0.3% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 averaging 2246 (-0.3% delta). These rival comparisons show that while the two processors are close to each other, they are also competitive with a range of other CPUs in their respective performance brackets.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-core performance in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2629 v3 wins the Cinebench R23 single-core test with a score of 1114, compared to the Intel Xeon D-1715TER's score of 1092. This represents a 2% performance advantage for the E5-2629 v3.

Q: How does the multicore performance compare between the two?

A: In the Cinebench R20 multicore test, the Intel Xeon E5-2629 v3 scores 3315, while the Intel Xeon D-1715TER scores 3249. The E5-2629 v3 holds a 2% lead in this test, and it also wins the multicore R23 test with a score of 7893 against 7738.

Q: What is the core and thread configuration for each chip?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2629 v3 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Xeon D-1715TER has 4 cores and 8 threads, which is exactly half the core and thread count of the E5-2629 v3.

Q: Are both processors still in production?

A: No. The Intel Xeon E5-2629 v3 is marked as end-of-life, while the Intel Xeon D-1715TER is marked as active production status.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock speed?

A: The Intel Xeon D-1715TER has a higher boost clock of 3.50 GHz, compared to the 3.20 GHz boost clock of the Intel Xeon E5-2629 v3. Their base clocks are identical at 2.40 GHz.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each CPU?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2629 v3 has an average benchmark score of 2283. The Intel Xeon D-1715TER has an average benchmark score of 2238, which is 45 points lower than the E5-2629 v3.

Where Each One Wins

The performance data is clear-cut: the Intel Xeon E5-2629 v3 wins every benchmark category. This makes it the stronger choice for any workload that relies heavily on multi-threaded performance, as evidenced by its consistent lead in the Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multicore tests. The advantage is largely due to its 8-core, 16-thread configuration, which provides more parallel processing capacity than the D-1715TER's 4-core, 8-thread design. For tasks like rendering, video encoding, or running multiple virtual machines, the E5-2629 v3's higher thread count gives it an edge.

The Intel Xeon D-1715TER, despite losing all benchmarks, still presents a compelling case in specific scenarios. Its wins are not in raw performance but in efficiency and platform features. It has a significantly lower TDP of 50 watts, compared to the E5-2629 v3's 85 watts, making it a more power-efficient option for dense server deployments where heat and energy consumption are primary concerns. Additionally, it supports PCIe Gen 4, offering 16 lanes, while the E5-2629 v3 is limited to PCIe Gen 3 with 40 lanes. This means the D-1715TER is better suited for newer, faster storage devices and accelerators that can utilize the increased bandwidth of the Gen 4 interface.

Specification Differences

The specifications of these two processors diverge significantly. The most obvious difference is in core count: the Intel Xeon E5-2629 v3 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Xeon D-1715TER has 4 cores and 8 threads. Their base clocks are the same at 2.40 GHz, but the D-1715TER has a higher boost clock of 3.50 GHz versus 3.20 GHz for the E5-2629 v3. The TDP also differs, with the E5-2629 v3 rated at 85 watts and the D-1715TER at 50 watts.

The memory support is another area of divergence. The E5-2629 v3 supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory across a quad-channel bus, offering a memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The D-1715TER supports only DDR4, uses a triple-channel bus, but achieves a slightly higher memory bandwidth of 64.0 GB/s. Both support ECC memory. The PCIe support is also different: the E5-2629 v3 provides 40 lanes of PCIe Gen 3, whereas the D-1715TER provides 16 lanes of PCIe Gen 4.

Finally, the physical packages are completely different. The E5-2629 v3 uses the Intel Socket 2011-3, while the D-1715TER is a BGA 2227 (soldered) package. This means the E5-2629 v3 can be replaced in a compatible motherboard, while the D-1715TER is integrated into its board.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two chips is vast, reflecting their different release dates and design goals. The Intel Xeon E5-2629 v3 is based on the Haswell architecture, with a 22 nm process node. It is codenamed Haswell-EP and packs 2,600 million transistors on a die size of 356 mm². Its cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, along with a 20 MB shared L3 cache. This is a server processor from the earlier part of the last decade, built for raw throughput.

In contrast, the Intel Xeon D-1715TER is based on the Ice Lake architecture, specifically Ice Lake-D, and is built on a much more advanced 10 nm process node. The newer process allows for significant efficiency gains. Its cache structure is different, featuring 80 KB of L1 and 1.25 MB of L2 per core, with a smaller 10 MB shared L3 cache. The larger L2 cache per core and smaller L3 are a hallmark of the newer architecture, designed to reduce latency and improve per-core efficiency. The D-1715TER also comes from a newer generation, being released in 2022 versus 2014 for the E5-2629 v3.

The Verdict

The data presents a straightforward choice based on workload priorities. For users who need maximum multi-threaded performance, the Intel Xeon E5-2629 v3 is the clear winner in this comparison. It outperforms the D-1715TER in every single Cinebench test, including a 2% lead in both single-core and multicore R23 benchmarks. Its 8-core, 16-thread design is the primary driver of this success, making it the better option for heavily parallelized tasks such as 3D rendering, scientific computing, or any workload that can utilize a higher thread count. The fact that it is end-of-life may not matter for a dedicated server build where maximum computational density is the goal.

Conversely, the Intel Xeon D-1715TER is the more balanced and modern choice for a different set of scenarios. Despite losing on raw benchmark score, its advantages lie in its platform. Its 50-watt TDP makes it far more energy-efficient, and its support for PCIe Gen 4 allows for faster connectivity to modern NVMe drives and accelerators. The smaller 4-core, 8-thread configuration, while less powerful, is enough for many server workloads like network storage, edge computing, or lightweight virtualization. Its active production status and newer 10 nm process also suggest a longer lifecycle for the platform. The D-1715TER is the pick for a power-conscious, modern system, while the E5-2629 v3 is for those who prioritize raw compute performance above all else.