CPU Comparison

The Intel Xeon W-2135 and Intel Xeon E-2246G are both end-of-life, 6-core/12-thread server processors built on Intel's 14 nm process, yet they target fundamentally different platform philosophies. Benchmark results show the W-2135 winning all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, with deltas consistently between 4.1% and 4.2%. However, the E-2246G counters with a higher boost clock (4.80 GHz vs 4.50 GHz), a larger shared L3 cache (12 MB vs 8.25 MB), integrated graphics, and a significantly lower TDP (80 W vs 140 W). The data suggests the W-2135 is the raw compute leader, while the E-2246G offers platform efficiency and flexibility, making the choice dependent on whether the workload prioritizes peak multi-threaded performance or system-level power and integration.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but narrow performance hierarchy. The Intel Xeon W-2135 wins every single benchmark recorded in the head-to-head comparison, from Cinebench R15 multi-core (1230 vs 1181) through to Cinebench R23 single-core (1723 vs 1654). The largest margins are in single-core tests, where the W-2135 leads by 4.2% across R15, R20, and R23; multi-core tests show a consistent 4.1% advantage. This pattern indicates that the W-2135's architecture extracts more work per clock cycle in these specific workloads, despite the E-2246G having a higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz compared to 4.50 GHz.

For users prioritizing raw compute throughput in Cinebench-style rendering, the W-2135 is the statistically superior part. Its average benchmark score of 3530 also edges out the E-2246G's 3492, placing both in the 55th percentile of all CPUs. However, the E-2246G is not without merit. Its 80 W TDP is 42.9% lower than the W-2135's 140 W, which has profound implications for cooling requirements, operating costs, and system density. The E-2246G also integrates HD Graphics P630, eliminating the need for a discrete GPU in basic display scenarios, and its dual-channel memory bus (42.7 GB/s) is simpler to populate than the W-2135's quad-channel setup (85.3 GB/s).

The verdict hinges on platform priorities. If the goal is maximum compute from a CPU that sits in the 55th percentile with a quad-channel memory subsystem, the W-2135 justifies its launch MSRP of $835. If the goal is a power-efficient, lower-cost server with integrated graphics and a more modest memory footprint, the E-2246G at its $311 launch MSRP is the logical pick. The W-2135 wins on performance, but the E-2246G wins on efficiency and integration.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Xeon W-2135 consistently outperforms the E-2246G in single-core tests. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the W-2135 scores 173 versus 166, a 4.2% advantage. This same 4.2% delta appears in R20 (723 vs 694) and R23 (1723 vs 1654).

Q: Is the E-2246G more power-efficient than the W-2135?

A: Yes, the data shows a substantial difference in thermal design power. The E-2246G has a TDP of 80 W, while the W-2135 has a TDP of 140 W. This 60 W difference suggests the E-2246G will generate significantly less heat and require less robust cooling solutions.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon W-2135 and the Intel Xeon E-2246G support ECC memory. However, they differ in memory channel configuration: the W-2135 supports quad-channel DDR4 with 85.3 GB/s bandwidth, while the E-2246G supports dual-channel DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: Only the Intel Xeon E-2246G includes integrated graphics, specifically HD Graphics P630. The Intel Xeon W-2135 does not have any integrated graphics, meaning it requires a discrete GPU for display output.

Q: How does the cache configuration differ between the two?

A: The W-2135 has 1 MB of L2 cache per core and 8.25 MB of shared L3 cache. The E-2246G has 256 KB of L2 cache per core but a larger 12 MB of shared L3 cache. Both share 64 KB of L1 cache per core.

Q: What is the release date difference?

A: The Intel Xeon W-2135 was released on 2017-08-28, while the Intel Xeon E-2246G was released on 2019-05-28. Both are now classified as end-of-life products.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split between these two Xeons is stark. The W-2135 is built on the Skylake architecture (codename Skylake-W) and physically occupies a 484 mm² die. This large die size is a hallmark of the high-end desktop and workstation platform, designed to accommodate a massive 48 PCIe Gen 3 lanes directly from the CPU. In contrast, the E-2246G uses the Coffee Lake architecture (codename Coffee Lake-S WS) on a much smaller 154 mm² die, which is typical of mainstream desktop-derived silicon. This smaller die explains the E-2246G's lower TDP and its 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, a fraction of the W-2135's lane count.

Both processors are manufactured on Intel's 14 nm process at Intel's foundry, and neither has a listed transistor count. The memory controllers differ fundamentally: the W-2135 features a quad-channel DDR4 bus delivering 85.3 GB/s, while the E-2246G uses a dual-channel bus with half the theoretical bandwidth at 42.7 GB/s. This memory bandwidth disparity is a direct consequence of the platform socket differences, with the W-2135 using Intel Socket 2066 and the E-2246G using Intel Socket 1151.

The E-2246G includes an integrated graphics solution, HD Graphics P630, which is absent from the W-2135. This is a significant architectural feature for headless servers or systems that need basic display capability without a dedicated GPU. The L2 cache hierarchy also differs: the W-2135 allocates 1 MB per core, while the E-2246G allocates only 256 KB per core, though the E-2246G compensates with a larger 12 MB shared L3 cache versus the W-2135's 8.25 MB. The W-2135's generation is listed as "Xeon W (Skylake-W)", while the E-2246G is from the "Xeon E (Coffee Lake)" generation, placing them in different product families despite similar core counts.

Specification Differences

The most critical specification difference is the socket: the W-2135 uses Intel Socket 2066, while the E-2246G uses Intel Socket 1151. This alone dictates motherboard compatibility and prevents any cross-platform upgrade. The TDP difference is equally pronounced at 140 W for the W-2135 versus 80 W for the E-2246G. Clock speeds also differ, with the W-2135 having a higher base clock (3.70 GHz vs 3.60 GHz) but a lower boost clock (4.50 GHz vs 4.80 GHz). Despite the E-2246G's higher boost, the benchmark data shows the W-2135 winning all single-core tests, suggesting the Skylake architecture has a per-clock performance edge in these workloads.

Cache configurations differ significantly. The W-2135 has 1 MB L2 per core versus 256 KB per core for the E-2246G, but the E-2246G has 12 MB shared L3 versus 8.25 MB for the W-2135. Memory support is DDR4 for both, but the W-2135 supports quad-channel with 85.3 GB/s bandwidth, while the E-2246G is dual-channel at 42.7 GB/s. PCIe lane counts are 48 for the W-2135 versus 16 for the E-2246G, both Gen 3. The E-2246G includes integrated HD Graphics P630, while the W-2135 has none. The launch MSRP is $835 for the W-2135 and $311 for the E-2246G, a substantial price gap that reflects the W-2135's larger die and quad-channel memory controller. The die sizes are 484 mm² for the W-2135 and 154 mm² for the E-2246G. Release dates are 2017-08-28 for the W-2135 and 2019-05-28 for the E-2246G. Both are locked (multiplierUnlocked: false) and support ECC memory.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is remarkably consistent, with the W-2135 winning all six recorded Cinebench tests. In multi-core tests, the W-2135 scores 1230 in Cinebench R15 versus 1181 for the E-2246G, a 4.1% delta. This pattern repeats in R20 (5126 vs 4922, 4.1%) and R23 (12205 vs 11720, 4.1%). The consistency of the 4.1% margin across multiple Cinebench versions suggests a stable architectural advantage rather than a workload-specific anomaly.

Single-core tests show a slightly larger gap. The W-2135 leads by 4.2% in R15 (173 vs 166), R20 (723 vs 694), and R23 (1723 vs 1654). This is particularly interesting because the E-2246G has a higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz compared to 4.50 GHz. The W-2135 wins despite a 0.30 GHz clock deficit, implying that the Skylake core achieves higher instructions-per-clock (IPC) than the Coffee Lake core in these single-threaded workloads. The average benchmark scores reflect this overall trend: the W-2135 averages 3530 across all benchmark suites, while the E-2246G averages 3492.

The E-2246G does have one benchmark not present in the W-2135's data set: Geekbench scores. The E-2246G scores 5988 in Geekbench multi-core and 1613 in single-core. Without a corresponding W-2135 Geekbench result in the head-to-head table, these numbers cannot be directly compared, but they are included in the E-2246G's average score calculation. The W-2135's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-12300 (deltaPct 0) and the Intel Xeon W-1290TE (deltaPct -0.1), while the E-2246G's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon E5-1680 v4 (deltaPct 0) and the Intel Core i9-9900T (deltaPct -0.2).

Where Each One Wins

The W-2135 wins exclusively in all benchmark tests recorded. Its six wins are spread across multi-core and single-core Cinebench R15, R20, and R23. This makes it the clear choice for workloads that resemble these rendering and compute tasks. The 4.1% multi-core advantage means tasks like video rendering, 3D model generation, or CPU-based batch processing will complete measurably faster on the W-2135. The 4.2% single-core advantage extends this win to lightly-threaded applications that rely on fast single-thread response, such as legacy software or certain simulation tools. The quad-channel memory interface (85.3 GB/s) further reinforces the W-2135's suitability for memory-bandwidth-intensive workloads, even though the benchmark scores do not directly measure memory throughput.

The E-2246G wins in areas not captured by Cinebench scores. Its 80 W TDP versus 140 W makes it vastly more suitable for dense server deployments, small form factor chassis, or environments where heat dissipation is a constraint. The integrated HD Graphics P630 provides display output without a discrete GPU, which is a functional win for basic server management or media systems. The 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes are sufficient for typical single-GPU or NVMe configurations, while the 48 lanes on the W-2135 enable multi-GPU or high-expansion builds. The E-2246G's larger 12 MB L3 cache could theoretically benefit applications with high cache reuse, though the benchmark data does not isolate this variable. The lower launch MSRP of $311 versus $835 also positions the E-2246G as the more accessible entry point, though this is a platform cost consideration rather than a performance metric.

In summary, the W-2135 wins every performance test in the data set, while the E-2246G wins on power efficiency, integration, and platform simplicity. The choice depends entirely on whether peak compute or system efficiency takes precedence in the target deployment.