Intel Xeon E-2186G vs Intel Xeon W-2135 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a consistent, narrow victory for the Intel Xeon W-2135 across every single Cinebench test recorded. The largest and most representative margin is a 6.2% lead in multi-core workloads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the W-2135 scores 12205 against the E-2186G's 11492, a difference of 713 points. This pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the W-2135 posts 5126 versus 4826, and in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the scores are 1230 and 1158 respectively.

The single-core results tell the same story with a slightly smaller edge. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the W-2135 scores 1723, while the E-2186G manages 1622, a 6.2% advantage. The gap holds at 6.1% in Cinebench R15 single-core, with scores of 173 and 163. Notably, the E-2186G does have additional Geekbench results in the database, scoring 6204 in multi-core and 1550 in single-core, but the W-2135 has no recorded Geekbench scores for comparison, so those cannot be used to establish a head-to-head result.

The win tally is unambiguous: the W-2135 takes 6 wins, and the E-2186G takes 0. However, the margins are small enough that the two chips are clearly in the same performance tier. The W-2135's average benchmark score is 3530, and the E-2186G's is 3462, a difference of 68 points, which places them only 2% apart in aggregate. The database also shows both processors sitting near the 55th and 54th percentiles of all CPUs respectively, confirming that neither chip is a standout, but both are respectable middle-of-the-pack performers. The W-2135's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-12300 with an identical average score of 3532, and the Intel Core i5-10600K at 3533, which puts the W-2135 in company with mainstream desktop parts despite its workstation branding.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel architectures and are built for different sockets. The Xeon W-2135 uses the Skylake-W design on a 14 nm process node, with a die size of 484 mm². The Xeon E-2186G uses the Coffee Lake-S WS design, also on a 14 nm node, but with a much smaller die at 154 mm². This is a substantial physical difference, with the W-2135's die being over three times larger, which reflects the additional silicon needed for its memory controller and PCIe lanes.

Both chips feature 6 cores and 12 threads, and both support ECC memory. The cache layouts diverge significantly. The W-2135 has 1 MB of L2 cache per core, while the E-2186G has only 256 KB per core. Conversely, the E-2186G has 12 MB of shared L3 cache, while the W-2135 has 8.25 MB. The L1 cache is identical at 64 KB per core. The larger L3 on the E-2186G does not translate to a performance win in the recorded Cinebench tests, which suggests the W-2135's memory subsystem advantages compensate for the smaller L3.

Memory support is a major differentiator. The W-2135 uses quad-channel DDR4 memory with a theoretical bandwidth of 85.3 GB/s, while the E-2186G uses dual-channel DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s. That is a 100% difference in memory bandwidth, and it likely contributes to the W-2135's multi-core lead, particularly in sustained workloads. The PCIe lane count also favors the W-2135, which provides 48 Gen 3 lanes versus the E-2186G's 16 lanes. The E-2186G does include integrated graphics in the form of HD Graphics P630, while the W-2135 has no integrated graphics, which is typical for HEDT workstation parts.

The socket situation is critical for system planning. The W-2135 requires Intel Socket 2066, while the E-2186G uses Intel Socket 1151. These are not interchangeable, so the choice of processor dictates the motherboard platform entirely. The W-2135 also has a higher TDP at 140 watts versus the E-2186G's 95 watts, which affects cooling requirements and power delivery design.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion: the Intel Xeon W-2135 is the faster processor in every measured Cinebench workload, but the margins are modest. A 6.2% lead in both single-core and multi-core tests is real but not transformative. Buyers who need the absolute best performance in the recorded benchmarks should choose the W-2135, especially if they can take advantage of its quad-channel memory bandwidth and 48 PCIe lanes.

The E-2186G is the more efficient choice in terms of power, with a 95 watt TDP versus 140 watts, and it offers integrated graphics, which the W-2135 lacks. It also has a smaller die and a more common Socket 1151 platform, which may simplify system building if the motherboard ecosystem is a consideration. However, the benchmark scores do not favor the E-2186G in any recorded test.

The E-2186G does have one advantage in the database: it has recorded Geekbench scores, while the W-2135 does not. This is not a performance comparison, but it indicates the E-2186G has been tested in a broader range of workloads. The W-2135's average benchmark score of 3530 is higher than the E-2186G's 3462, and its percentile ranking of 55 versus 54 is also slightly better. For a system where multi-threaded rendering or simulation is the primary task, the W-2135's higher Cinebench scores and memory bandwidth make it the data-backed winner.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on several key specification fields. The base clock is 3.70 GHz for the W-2135 and 3.80 GHz for the E-2186G, and the boost clock is 4.50 GHz versus 4.70 GHz. Despite the E-2186G's higher clocks, the W-2135 wins all benchmark tests, which indicates the W-2135's memory bandwidth and cache architecture are more impactful than the raw clock advantage.

The TDP differs by 45 watts, with the W-2135 at 140 watts and the E-2186G at 95 watts. The sockets are different, as are the architectures and codenames. The die size is a major difference at 484 mm² versus 154 mm². The L2 cache is 1 MB per core on the W-2135 versus 256 KB per core on the E-2186G, while the L3 cache is 8.25 MB shared versus 12 MB shared. Memory channels are quad on the W-2135 and dual on the E-2186G, with bandwidth ratings of 85.3 GB/s and 42.7 GB/s respectively. PCIe lanes are 48 versus 16. The E-2186G has integrated graphics, the W-2135 does not. The release dates are also different, with the W-2135 launching in 2017 and the E-2186G in 2018.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2186G has a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, while the Intel Xeon W-2135 has a boost clock of 4.50 GHz.

Q: Does the Intel Xeon W-2135 support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the W-2135 and the E-2186G support ECC memory. The W-2135 supports quad-channel DDR4, while the E-2186G supports dual-channel DDR4.

Q: Which CPU has more PCIe lanes?

A: The Intel Xeon W-2135 provides 48 Gen 3 lanes, while the Intel Xeon E-2186G provides 16 Gen 3 lanes.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two?

A: The W-2135 has an average benchmark score of 3530, and the E-2186G has an average score of 3462, a difference of 68 points.

Q: Does the Intel Xeon E-2186G have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the E-2186G includes HD Graphics P630. The W-2135 has no integrated graphics.

Q: Which CPU won the most benchmark tests in the database?

A: The Intel Xeon W-2135 won all 6 recorded head-to-head Cinebench tests, while the E-2186G won none.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon W-2135 wins every recorded Cinebench test, with a consistent 6.1% to 6.2% margin in both single-core and multi-core workloads. Its quad-channel memory interface provides 85.3 GB/s of bandwidth, which is double the E-2186G's 42.7 GB/s, making it the better choice for memory-intensive workloads such as large in-memory databases, complex simulations, or high-resolution rendering where data throughput is the bottleneck. The 48 PCIe lanes also make it more suitable for systems with multiple GPUs, NVMe storage arrays, or high-speed networking cards that need direct CPU connectivity.

The Intel Xeon E-2186G wins on efficiency and platform simplicity. Its 95 watt TDP is significantly lower than the W-2135's 140 watts, which reduces cooling and power delivery requirements. The integrated HD Graphics P630 provides a display output without a discrete GPU, which can simplify deployment in headless servers or basic workstations. The dual-channel memory architecture and 16 PCIe lanes are more modest, but they are sufficient for many single-GPU workstation builds. The E-2186G also has a smaller die at 154 mm², which may indicate lower manufacturing complexity, and it runs on the common Socket 1151 platform, which offers a broader range of motherboard options.

For users who prioritize raw compute performance in the recorded benchmarks, the choice is the W-2135. For users who prioritize lower power draw, integrated graphics, and a more mainstream socket, the E-2186G is the data-supported alternative, even though it trails in every benchmark test. The database shows no scenario where the E-2186G outperforms the W-2135 in compute speed, so the decision hinges on system-level factors rather than processor performance.