CPU Comparison

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon E-2234 wins every single benchmark in this comparison. Across six Cinebench tests, it leads the Intel Xeon E3-1285 v6 by margins ranging from 0.9% to 1.1%. The E-2234’s average benchmark score of 2374 sits 1.1% above the E3-1285 v6’s 2348. Both CPUs occupy the same 48th percentile among all CPUs, meaning neither is a performance outlier, but the E-2234 is consistently the faster part.

For a builder choosing between these two, the E-2234 is the straightforward pick if you want the best scores on the board. It wins in multi-core and single-core across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23. The E3-1285 v6 is not without merit, it has a higher base clock (4.10 GHz vs 3.60 GHz), but that advantage does not translate into a single benchmark victory. If you are upgrading or building fresh on LGA 1151 and can source the E-2234, the data says take it. The E3-1285 v6 makes sense only if you already own one, are constrained to Kaby Lake boards, or need its specific integrated graphics configuration (HD Graphics P630 vs UHD Graphics P630). Otherwise, the E-2234 is the superior choice in every measured workload.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are Intel parts on the 14 nm process, but they come from different architecture generations. The E-2234 is based on Coffee Lake, specifically the Coffee Lake-S WS die, while the E3-1285 v6 uses Kaby Lake, the Kaby Lake-DT die. Coffee Lake is the newer architecture, and the E-2234 belongs to the Xeon E-2200 series, released in May 2019. The E3-1285 v6 is from the Xeon E3 (Kaby Lake-DT) generation, released in July 2017.

The die sizes differ notably. The E3-1285 v6 has a 160 mm² die with 1,400 million transistors, while the E-2234 has a smaller 126 mm² die (transistor count not listed). Both have the same core and thread configuration: 4 cores, 8 threads. Cache is identical in structure: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3. Both support DDR4 memory in dual-channel mode, and both support ECC memory. PCIe is also the same: Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU.

The key architectural difference beyond the node generation is clock speed strategy. The E3-1285 v6 has a higher base clock of 4.10 GHz but a lower boost clock of 4.50 GHz. The E-2234 has a lower base of 3.60 GHz but a much higher boost of 4.80 GHz. This suggests the E-2234 leans on turbo behavior for performance, while the E3-1285 v6 runs faster at stock. Thermal design power differs slightly: the E-2234 is rated at 71 W, the E3-1285 v6 at 79 W. The integrated graphics also differ: the E-2234 carries UHD Graphics P630, the E3-1285 v6 has HD Graphics P630.

Both CPUs are locked (multiplier unlocked: false), share the same Intel Socket 1151, and target the server/workstation market segment. The E-2234 is marked end-of-life; production status for the E3-1285 v6 is not listed.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the E-2234 wins everywhere. It takes all six head-to-head tests. The margins are narrow but consistent. In multi-core tests, the E-2234 leads by 1.1% in Cinebench R15 (827 vs 818), R20 (3448 vs 3409), and R23 (8210 vs 8119). In single-core tests, the lead is 0.9% in R15 (116 vs 115), 1.0% in R20 (486 vs 481), and 1.1% in R23 (1159 vs 1146).

So where does the E3-1285 v6 have any claim? The data shows no benchmark win, but the architecture suggests a different use case. The E3-1285 v6 has a higher base clock (4.10 GHz vs 3.60 GHz), which means it maintains higher frequency under sustained all-core loads if turbo is not engaged. That is not reflected in the Cinebench scores, which favor the E-2234 even in multi-core. However, the E3-1285 v6 has a lower boost clock (4.50 GHz vs 4.80 GHz), so the E-2234 pulls ahead when single-threaded turbo kicks in.

For workloads that are heavily single-threaded and bursty, the E-2234’s 4.80 GHz boost is the clear advantage. For workloads that hammer all cores at base clock for extended periods, the E3-1285 v6’s 4.10 GHz base might theoretically hold up better, but the benchmark results contradict that, the E-2234 still wins multi-core. The E3-1285 v6 also has a larger die (160 mm² vs 126 mm²) and more transistors (1,400 million vs not listed), which could imply different thermal behavior, but the higher TDP (79 W vs 71 W) suggests it runs hotter. If you are constrained by cooling, the E-2234’s lower TDP is a practical advantage.

In short: the E-2234 wins on every measured metric. The E3-1285 v6’s only theoretical edge is base clock frequency, which does not translate into any Cinebench victory.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2234 wins all three multi-core tests. It scores 827 vs 818 in Cinebench R15, 3448 vs 3409 in R20, and 8210 vs 8119 in R23. The margin is 1.1% in each case.

Q: Does the higher base clock of the E3-1285 v6 matter?

A: The E3-1285 v6 has a 4.10 GHz base clock versus 3.60 GHz for the E-2234. However, this does not produce any benchmark win. The E-2234’s higher boost clock (4.80 GHz vs 4.50 GHz) appears to dominate in all tested scenarios.

Q: Are these CPUs similar in overall performance?

A: Yes, very close. The E-2234 has an average benchmark score of 2374, while the E3-1285 v6 scores 2348, a 1.1% difference. Both sit at the 48th percentile among all CPUs.

Q: Do both support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the E-2234 and the E3-1285 v6 support ECC memory. Both also support DDR4 in dual-channel configuration.

Q: What are the differences in integrated graphics?

A: The E-2234 has UHD Graphics P630, while the E3-1285 v6 has HD Graphics P630. Both are Intel integrated graphics solutions for the server/workstation segment.

Q: Which CPU has a lower power draw?

A: The E-2234 has a TDP of 71 W, while the E3-1285 v6 is rated at 79 W. The E-2234 is the more power-efficient part on paper.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are a clean sweep for the E-2234, but the margins are tight enough that the two CPUs are effectively in the same performance class. The largest win is 1.1%, which appears in Cinebench R15 multi-core, R20 multi-core, and R23 multi-core. The smallest win is 0.9% in Cinebench R15 single-core.

Let’s walk through the multi-core results first. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the E-2234 scores 827 against 818 for the E3-1285 v6, a 1.1% lead. In R20 multi-core, the gap widens slightly in absolute terms: 3448 vs 3409, still 1.1%. In R23 multi-core, the E-2234 hits 8210 vs 8119, again 1.1%. The consistency is remarkable, across three generations of Cinebench, the relative advantage does not change.

Single-core results follow the same pattern. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 116 vs 115, a 0.9% edge for the E-2234. R20 single-core is 486 vs 481, a 1.0% lead. R23 single-core is 1159 vs 1146, a 1.1% advantage. The E-2234’s single-core boost of 4.80 GHz clearly provides a small but consistent edge over the E3-1285 v6’s 4.50 GHz boost.

The overall average benchmark score tells the same story: 2374 for the E-2234, 2348 for the E3-1285 v6. In terms of nearest rivals, the E-2234 sits 0.4% above the Intel Xeon E-2226GE (2365) and 0.8% above the Intel Core i5-9600 (2354). The E3-1285 v6 sits 0.3% below the i5-9600 and 0.7% below the Xeon E-2226GE. Notably, the E-2234 is listed as a rival to the E3-1285 v6 with a deltaPct of -1.1%, meaning the E3-1285 v6 trails the E-2234 by that margin. This is the same deltaPct seen in the head-to-head multi-core tests.

If you are looking at raw scores, the differences are small, a few points in single-core, a few dozen in multi-core. But they are consistent across every test. There is no test where the E3-1285 v6 pulls ahead, which makes the decision easy for anyone optimizing purely for Cinebench-style workloads.

Specification Differences

The two CPUs differ in several specification fields, though they share the same core/thread count, cache layout, socket, memory type, and PCIe configuration.

• Architecture: E-2234 is Coffee Lake (Coffee Lake-S WS); E3-1285 v6 is Kaby Lake (Kaby Lake-DT).
• Base Clock: E-2234 runs at 3.60 GHz; E3-1285 v6 runs at 4.10 GHz.
• Boost Clock: E-2234 boosts to 4.80 GHz; E3-1285 v6 boosts to 4.50 GHz.
• TDP: E-2234 is rated at 71 W; E3-1285 v6 is rated at 79 W.
• Die Size: E-2234 has a 126 mm² die; E3-1285 v6 has a 160 mm² die.
• Transistors: E3-1285 v6 has 1,400 million transistors; transistor count for E-2234 is not listed.
• Integrated Graphics: E-2234 has UHD Graphics P630; E3-1285 v6 has HD Graphics P630.
• Memory Bandwidth: E-2234 is rated at 42.7 GB/s; E3-1285 v6 has no listed memory bandwidth.
• Release Date: E-2234 launched May 28, 2019; E3-1285 v6 launched July 31, 2017.
• Launch MSRP: E-2234 launched at $250; E3-1285 v6 has no listed launch MSRP.
• Production Status: E-2234 is end-of-life; E3-1285 v6 has no listed production status.
• Part Number: E-2234 is SRFAX; E3-1285 v6 is SR373.

Both CPUs are 14 nm Intel parts with 4 cores and 8 threads, 8 MB shared L3 cache, dual-channel DDR4 support, ECC memory support, Gen 3 PCIe with 16 lanes, and a locked multiplier. The E-2234 is the newer, more refined part with a lower TDP and higher boost clock, while the E3-1285 v6 offers a higher base clock but falls behind in every benchmark.