Intel Xeon E-2224 vs Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data paints a clear and consistent picture: the Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 wins every recorded Cinebench test against the Intel Xeon E-2224. The margins are narrow but uniform across all six workloads, with the E5-1620 v4 holding a lead of roughly 2.1 to 2.3 percent in each case.

In Cinebench R15, the E5-1620 v4 scores 627 in the multi-core test against 614 for the E-2224, a 2.1 percent advantage. The single-core result is nearly identical in relative terms: 88 versus 86, a 2.3 percent edge. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multi-core scores are 2616 and 2559 respectively, with the E5-1620 v4 ahead by 2.2 percent; the single-core gap is also 2.2 percent, at 369 versus 361.

Cinebench R23 follows the same pattern. The E5-1620 v4 posts 6230 in multi-core, while the E-2224 manages 6093, a 2.2 percent difference. In single-core, the scores are 879 and 860, again a 2.2 percent margin. None of these deltas are large enough to call one processor transformative over the other in raw rendering throughput, but the consistency is notable: the E5-1620 v4 wins all six head-to-head matchups, with no test going the other way.

The average benchmark scores in the database reinforce this. The E5-1620 v4 carries an average score of 1802, while the E-2224 sits at 1762. That works out to roughly a 2.3 percent overall gap. In terms of percentile ranking against all CPUs, the E5-1620 v4 lands at the 42nd percentile, and the E-2224 at the 41st. Both are mid-pack performers, but the E5-1620 v4 is marginally better positioned.

When placed against their nearest rivals, the differences become clearer. The E5-1620 v4 averages 1802, nearly matching the Intel Core i3-9100 at 1806 (a -0.2 percent delta) and the Intel Core i3-9320 at 1808 (also -0.2 percent). It trades blows with the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U at 1810 (-0.4 percent) and sits just ahead of the AMD Opteron 6281 at 1789 (0.7 percent). The E-2224, by contrast, averages 1762 and is closely matched with the Intel Core i5-5675C at 1759 (0.2 percent), the AMD Ryzen 5 2400GE at 1766 (-0.2 percent), the Intel Xeon E3-1241 v3 at 1756 (0.3 percent), and the Intel Core i7-4790T at 1755 (0.4 percent). In both cases, the nearest rivals are separated by less than half a percent, meaning these Xeons are not outliers in their performance class.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: the Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 is the faster processor in this comparison. It wins every benchmark test recorded in the database, and its average score is higher. The lead is small, but it is consistent across single-core and multi-core workloads.

That said, the margin is not large enough to make the E-2224 a poor choice in absolute terms. The E-2224 trails by only 2.2 percent in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is within the range of run-to-run variation for many workloads. But the recorded data shows no scenario where the E-2224 takes a win, so for users optimizing purely for Cinebench rendering performance, the E5-1620 v4 is the safer pick.

The E-2224 does have one clear advantage in the database: power consumption. It carries a TDP of 71 watts versus 140 watts for the E5-1620 v4. That is nearly half the thermal envelope, which could matter in dense server or workstation environments where cooling and power delivery are constrained. For workloads that are not heavily threaded, the E-2224's higher boost clock of 4.60 GHz versus 3.80 GHz might offer some headroom, but the benchmark scores do not reflect that advantage materializing in Cinebench.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel architectures and target different platforms. The E5-1620 v4 is built on Broadwell-EP, a 14 nm process, with a die size of 246 mm² and 3,400 million transistors. The E-2224 uses Coffee Lake-S WS, also on a 14 nm process, but with a smaller die at 126 mm² and no transistor count listed in the database.

Both chips have four physical cores, but threading differs. The E5-1620 v4 supports 8 threads, while the E-2224 supports only 4. That explains why the multi-core Cinebench scores are slightly higher for the E5-1620 v4 despite its lower boost clock. The E5-1620 v4 runs at a base clock of 3.50 GHz and boosts to 3.80 GHz; the E-2224 starts at 3.40 GHz and boosts to 4.60 GHz.

Cache configurations are similar in structure but differ in size. Both have 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core. The shared L3 cache is 10 MB on the E5-1620 v4 and 8 MB on the E-2224.

Memory support is a major differentiator. The E5-1620 v4 uses quad-channel DDR4 with a maximum bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, while the E-2224 uses dual-channel DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s. Both support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity also diverges: the E5-1620 v4 offers 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, while the E-2224 offers 16.

The sockets are incompatible. The E5-1620 v4 mounts on Intel Socket 2011-3, while the E-2224 uses Intel Socket 1151. The E-2224 also includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics P630), whereas the E5-1620 v4 has none listed.

The E5-1620 v4 was released in June 2016 with a launch MSRP of $294. The E-2224 came later, in May 2019, with a launch MSRP of $193. Both are marked as end-of-life in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-core performance in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 scores 6230, while the Intel Xeon E-2224 scores 6093. The E5-1620 v4 leads by 2.2 percent.

Q: Is the single-core performance gap different from the multi-core gap?

A: No, it is nearly identical. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the E5-1620 v4 scores 879 and the E-2224 scores 860, a 2.2 percent difference. The margins are consistently around 2.1 to 2.3 percent across all Cinebench tests.

Q: Does the E-2224 have any advantage in thread count?

A: No. The E-2224 has 4 threads, while the E5-1620 v4 has 8 threads. The E5-1620 v4 is the only one with Hyper-Threading-like capability in this comparison.

Q: Which processor supports more PCIe lanes?

A: The E5-1620 v4 supports 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, while the E-2224 supports 16 lanes.

Q: Can these two processors be used in the same motherboard?

A: No. The E5-1620 v4 uses Intel Socket 2011-3, and the E-2224 uses Intel Socket 1151. They are not compatible with each other's sockets.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The E-2224 includes UHD Graphics P630. The E5-1620 v4 has no integrated graphics listed in the database.

Where Each One Wins

Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4

The E5-1620 v4 wins every recorded benchmark against the E-2224, with advantages of 2.1 to 2.3 percent in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both single-core and multi-core. Its 8 threads give it a structural edge in multithreaded workloads, and its 10 MB L3 cache and quad-channel memory (76.8 GB/s versus 42.7 GB/s) make it better suited for memory-intensive tasks. The 40 PCIe lanes also provide more room for expansion cards, storage controllers, or multiple GPUs. Its higher average benchmark score (1802 versus 1762) and slightly better percentile rank (42 versus 41) place it ahead in the database's overall performance ranking.

Intel Xeon E-2224

The E-2224 does not win any benchmark in this head-to-head comparison, but it has clear platform-level advantages. Its 71 watt TDP is nearly half the 140 watt TDP of the E5-1620 v4, making it far easier to cool and less demanding on power delivery. Its 4.60 GHz boost clock is notably higher than the E5-1620 v4's 3.80 GHz, which could benefit lightly threaded software not captured in these Cinebench tests. The integrated UHD Graphics P630 allows for a display output without a discrete GPU, and the smaller die (126 mm² versus 246 mm²) suggests a more compact, lower-cost system. For server or workstation builds where power efficiency and simplicity are priorities, the E-2224 is the more practical option, even if it gives up a small amount of rendering performance.