CPU Comparison

# Intel Xeon E-2124G vs Intel Xeon E3-1280 v5: A Generational Oddity

This comparison pairs two end-of-life Intel Xeon workstation processors that share a socket but diverge sharply in threading, clock strategy, and generation. The E3-1280 v5 (Skylake-DT, 2015) wins every head-to-head benchmark in the data, yet the E-2124G (Coffee Lake-S WS, 2018) carries a higher boost clock and a newer architecture. The benchmark results suggest that the older chip's Hyper-Threading advantage and higher base clock consistently outweigh the newer chip's architectural refinements. Both sit at the 45th percentile among all CPUs, with nearly identical average benchmark scores (2034 vs 2029), making this a closer overall contest than the head-to-head sweep implies.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most benchmarks in the head-to-head comparison?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1280 v5 wins all six head-to-head tests, covering Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core variants. The E-2124G records zero wins.

Q: How large is the E3-1280 v5's typical advantage in Cinebench tests?

A: The E3-1280 v5 leads by roughly 13% across all six tests. The deltas are -13.3% (R15 multi), -13.1% (R15 single), -13.2% (R20 multi), -13% (R20 single), -13.2% (R23 multi), and -13.1% (R23 single).

Q: Do the two CPUs differ in thread count?

A: Yes. The E-2124G has 4 cores and 4 threads, while the E3-1280 v5 has 4 cores and 8 threads. The E3-1280 v5 supports Hyper-Threading; the E-2124G does not.

Q: What is the difference in boost clock speeds?

A: The E-2124G boosts to 4.50 GHz, which is higher than the E3-1280 v5's 4.00 GHz. However, the E3-1280 v5 has a higher base clock at 3.70 GHz versus 3.40 GHz.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both support ECC memory and use dual-channel DDR4. The E-2124G lists a memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s, while the E3-1280 v5 has no bandwidth figure in the data.

Q: Are both CPUs on the same manufacturing process?

A: Yes, both use Intel's 14 nm process. The E-2124G has a die size of 126 mm², while the E3-1280 v5 is slightly smaller at 122 mm² and lists 1,750 million transistors.

Architecture Differences

The two Xeon parts come from different Intel architectural generations despite sharing the same socket and process node. The E-2124G is built on Coffee Lake (codename Coffee Lake-S WS), while the E3-1280 v5 uses Skylake (codename Skylake-DT). Both are 14 nm parts from Intel's foundry, but the Coffee Lake part is the newer design, released in 2018 versus 2015 for the Skylake part.

The most significant architectural divergence is threading. The E-2124G offers 4 cores and 4 threads, meaning each core handles exactly one thread. The E3-1280 v5 doubles the thread count to 8 via Hyper-Threading, allowing each core to process two threads simultaneously. This explains the multi-core benchmark gap, but it also affects single-core results, where the E3-1280 v5 still leads despite the E-2124G's higher boost clock.

Cache hierarchies are identical on paper: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3. The die sizes differ slightly, 126 mm² for the E-2124G versus 122 mm² for the E3-1280 v5, with the older chip listing 1,750 million transistors. The E-2124G integrates HD Graphics P630, while the E3-1280 v5 has no integrated graphics. Both use PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, support dual-channel DDR4, and offer ECC memory. The newer chip lists a memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s; the older chip does not have a figure in the data.

Clock strategy is a key difference. The E3-1280 v5 runs a 3.70 GHz base clock with a 4.00 GHz boost. The E-2124G starts lower at 3.40 GHz but boosts higher to 4.50 GHz. This means the newer chip has a wider clock range and a higher ceiling, yet it still loses single-core tests. The TDP reflects this: the E3-1280 v5 draws 80 W, while the E-2124G is rated at 71 W.

Where Each One Wins

The head-to-head data is unambiguous: the E3-1280 v5 wins every benchmark. There are no tests where the E-2124G comes out ahead. This means the older Skylake part is the better performer in both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads as measured by Cinebench R15, R20, and R23.

For multi-core workloads, the E3-1280 v5's Hyper-Threading provides a clear structural advantage. With 8 threads versus 4, the older chip can process more parallel work per clock cycle. The multi-core deltas range from -13.2% to -13.3%, which is consistent across all three Cinebench versions. This suggests that the thread advantage translates evenly across different rendering workloads.

Single-core results are more surprising. The E-2124G has a 0.50 GHz higher boost clock, yet it still trails by 13.1% in single-core tests. This indicates that the Skylake architecture's higher base clock (3.70 GHz vs 3.40 GHz) and possibly better single-thread efficiency outweigh the raw clock-speed ceiling of the Coffee Lake part. The single-core scores, 86 vs 99 in R15, 361 vs 415 in R20, and 860 vs 990 in R23, all show the same approximate 13% gap.

The E-2124G does offer integrated graphics (HD Graphics P630), which the E3-1280 v5 lacks entirely. This is not a benchmark win, but it is a feature difference that matters for systems without a discrete GPU. The newer chip also has a lower TDP (71 W vs 80 W), which could imply lower power draw under load, though the data does not include power measurements.

Specification Differences

The two CPUs differ in several specification fields, while sharing others. Both use the Intel Socket 1151, have 4 cores, 8 MB shared L3 cache, dual-channel DDR4 memory, ECC support, PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes, and are end-of-life server/workstation parts. The differences are:

• Threads: E-2124G has 4; E3-1280 v5 has 8
• Base clock: 3.40 GHz vs 3.70 GHz
• Boost clock: 4.50 GHz vs 4.00 GHz
• TDP: 71 W vs 80 W
• Architecture: Coffee Lake vs Skylake
• Codename: Coffee Lake-S WS vs Skylake-DT
• Generation: Xeon E (Coffee Lake) vs Xeon E3 (Skylake-DT)
• Die size: 126 mm² vs 122 mm²
• Transistors: Not listed vs 1,750 million
• Memory bandwidth: 42.7 GB/s vs not listed
• Integrated graphics: HD Graphics P630 vs none
• Release date: 2018-07-11 vs 2015-10-18
• Launch MSRP: $218 vs $612
• Part number: SR3WL vs SR2LC

Both are 14 nm Intel parts, have identical L1 and L2 cache per core, and are locked (multiplier unlocked: false). The E-2124G's launch MSRP of $218 is notably lower than the E3-1280 v5's $612, though pricing is not a factor in benchmark performance.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The E3-1280 v5 dominates every measured test. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the older chip scores 707 against the E-2124G's 613, a -13.3% delta. Single-core R15 shows 99 vs 86, a -13.1% gap. The pattern holds in R20: multi-core 2946 vs 2558 (-13.2%), single-core 415 vs 361 (-13%). R23 repeats the trend with multi-core 7015 vs 6092 (-13.2%) and single-core 990 vs 860 (-13.1%).

The consistency of these deltas is striking. Every test lands within a narrow band of -13.0% to -13.3%, regardless of whether the workload is single-threaded or multi-threaded. This uniformity suggests that the performance difference is not workload-specific but rather a general per-clock efficiency or frequency advantage. The E3-1280 v5's higher base clock (3.70 GHz vs 3.40 GHz) likely plays a larger role than the boost clock, since sustained workloads tend to run near base clocks.

Geekbench results exist only for the E-2124G in the data (multi-core 4263, single-core 1438), so no head-to-head comparison is possible there. The E3-1280 v5 does not have Geekbench scores listed. The average benchmark scores are nearly identical, 2034 for the E-2124G and 2029 for the E3-1280 v5, which places both at the 45th percentile. This average, however, includes different test sets for each CPU, so it is not directly comparable to the head-to-head Cinebench results.

The E-2124G's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 4500U (avg 2035, 0% delta) and Intel Core i7-3960X (avg 2037, -0.1% delta). The E3-1280 v5's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon E3-1260L v5 (avg 2029, 0% delta) and Intel Xeon E3-1240 v5 (avg 2030, -0.1% delta). Both chips perform in a similar overall league, despite the head-to-head sweep.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion: the Intel Xeon E3-1280 v5 is the faster processor in every measured benchmark. Its 13% lead across all six Cinebench tests, spanning three versions and both single-core and multi-core modes, establishes it as the superior performer for rendering and compute workloads. The Hyper-Threading advantage (8 threads vs 4) explains the multi-core wins, while the higher base clock (3.70 GHz vs 3.40 GHz) likely accounts for the single-core victories despite the E-2124G's higher boost clock.

Who should pick the E3-1280 v5? Anyone prioritizing raw benchmark performance in Cinebench workloads. The chip wins every test, and its 80 W TDP is reasonable for a workstation part. The data shows no scenario where the E-2124G outperforms it.

Who should consider the E-2124G? Users who need integrated graphics (HD Graphics P630) without a discrete GPU. The chip also has a lower TDP (71 W vs 80 W) and a higher boost clock (4.50 GHz vs 4.00 GHz), which might appeal in short-burst workloads, though the benchmark data does not support a performance advantage. The newer Coffee Lake architecture and lower launch MSRP ($218 vs $612) are notable, but neither changes the benchmark results.

The bottom line from the data: if benchmark scores are the sole criterion, the E3-1280 v5 is the clear choice. Its consistent 13% lead across all tests makes the decision straightforward. The E-2124G offers features the older chip lacks, integrated graphics, lower TDP, but no performance wins. For a purely performance-driven purchase, the E3-1280 v5 wins decisively.