CPU Comparison

The benchmark data presents a clear and unusual outcome: the older Intel Xeon E3-1585L v5, despite having fewer cores and a lower boost clock, outperforms the newer Intel Xeon E-2276M across every single test in the comparison set. The Xeon E3-1585L v5 secures all six head-to-head victories, while the Xeon E-2276M records zero wins. This result runs counter to expectations based on generation and core count, so the analysis below examines the specific scores, architectural differences, and what each processor's strengths mean for a potential buyer.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking pattern in the data is the consistency of the margin. In every Cinebench test, the Xeon E3-1585L v5 leads the Xeon E-2276M by roughly 21.5%. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the E3-1585L v5 scores 6878 against 5400 for the E-2276M, a delta of -21.5% from the perspective of the E-2276M. The single-core R23 result shows the same story: 971 for the E3-1585L v5 versus 762 for the E-2276M, again a 21.5% gap. This is not a case where one chip wins on multi-threaded workloads and the other on lightly-threaded ones; the older processor dominates both.

The pattern holds across older Cinebench versions as well. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the E3-1585L v5 posts 2888, while the E-2276M manages 2268. The single-core R20 score is 407 versus 320. Cinebench R15 follows the same trajectory: 693 versus 544 in multi-core and 97 versus 76 in single-core. The deltas are nearly identical across all six tests, ranging from -21.4% to -21.6%. That uniformity suggests a fundamental per-clock or per-core efficiency advantage for the Skylake-based chip, rather than a workload-specific quirk.

The Geekbench results, which are only available for the E-2276M, show a multi-core score of 5159 and a single-core score of 1440. Since the Xeon E3-1585L v5 lacks Geekbench data in this comparison, it is not possible to directly compare those scores. However, the Cinebench results alone are decisive: the E3-1585L v5 wins all six head-to-head benchmarks. The average benchmark score for the E-2276M is 1996, while the E3-1585L v5 sits at 1989, a difference of only 0.4% in favor of the newer chip. That near-tie in overall average, despite the E3-1585L v5 winning every Cinebench test, suggests the E-2276M's Geekbench numbers are relatively strong, but they are not enough to shift the head-to-head outcome.

Both processors hold the same 44th percentile among all CPUs, meaning they are statistically equivalent in the broader market context. The nearest rivals for the E-2276M include the Intel Core i7-7920HQ and AMD Ryzen 5 1500X, each with an average score of 1992 and a delta of 0.2%, placing them essentially at parity. The Intel Core i5-8400T is 0.3% ahead, while the Intel Xeon E3-1285L v4 is 0.3% behind. For the E3-1585L v5, the nearest rival list is similar: the Xeon E3-1285L v4 is 0.1% ahead, the Core i5-8279U is 0.1% behind, the Ryzen 5 1500X is 0.1% behind, and the Ryzen Embedded V1756B is 0.2% behind. These rival deltas are all within a fraction of a percent, confirming that both chips occupy the same performance tier despite the large Cinebench gaps between them.

The Verdict

From the data alone, the Intel Xeon E3-1585L v5 is the clear performer in this pairing. It wins every benchmark for which both chips have results, and it does so by a consistent margin of about 21.5%. For anyone prioritizing raw CPU throughput in Cinebench-style workloads, the choice is unambiguous: the E3-1585L v5 delivers substantially higher scores across multi-core and single-core tests alike. The Xeon E-2276M, despite being from a newer generation and offering more cores and threads, cannot match that level of performance in these tests.

That said, the verdict is not a total dismissal of the E-2276M. Its average benchmark score of 1996 is slightly higher than the E3-1585L v5's 1989, and it has a higher boost clock of 4.70 GHz compared to 3.70 GHz. The E-2276M also supports DDR4 memory exclusively with a bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s, versus the E3-1585L v5's dual DDR3/DDR4 support at 34.1 GB/s. For workloads that are memory-bandwidth sensitive or that benefit from the newer Coffee Lake architecture, the E-2276M may hold an edge, but those advantages are not reflected in the benchmark data provided. The E3-1585L v5 is the pick for raw compute performance; the E-2276M is the pick for those who value the newer platform features and the higher memory bandwidth, assuming the performance deficit is acceptable.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1585L v5 wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests. The Xeon E-2276M records zero wins in the comparison.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest delta is -21.6% in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the E3-1585L v5 scores 97 versus the E-2276M's 76. All other deltas are between -21.4% and -21.5%.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Xeon E-2276M has an average benchmark score of 1996, while the Xeon E3-1585L v5 has an average score of 1989, a difference of 0.4% in favor of the E-2276M.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon E-2276M and the Intel Xeon E3-1585L v5 support ECC memory, as indicated in their specifications.

Q: What is the core and thread count difference?

A: The Xeon E-2276M has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Xeon E3-1585L v5 has 4 cores and 8 threads. Despite having fewer cores, the E3-1585L v5 wins all Cinebench tests.

Q: Are both processors still in production?

A: No. Both the Intel Xeon E-2276M and the Intel Xeon E3-1585L v5 are marked as end-of-life products.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications. The Xeon E-2276M has 6 cores and 12 threads, whereas the Xeon E3-1585L v5 has 4 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks are 2.80 GHz for the E-2276M and 3.00 GHz for the E3-1585L v5, but the boost clocks diverge significantly: 4.70 GHz versus 3.70 GHz. Both have a 45 W TDP. The cache configurations differ as well: the E-2276M has 12 MB of shared L3 cache, while the E3-1585L v5 has 8 MB of shared L3 cache. L1 and L2 caches are identical at 64 KB and 256 KB per core, respectively.

Memory support is another point of difference. The E-2276M supports only DDR4 with a dual-channel bus and a bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. The E3-1585L v5 supports both DDR3 and DDR4, also dual-channel, but with a lower bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. Both have the same PCIe configuration: Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The integrated graphics differ: the E-2276M uses UHD Graphics P630, while the E3-1585L v5 uses Iris Pro Graphics P580. Both are locked (multiplier not unlocked) and use the Intel BGA 1440 socket. The launch MSRP for the E-2276M is $450, and for the E3-1585L v5 it is $445.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is significant. The Xeon E-2276M is built on Coffee Lake (codename Coffee Lake-H) from the Xeon E-2200 series, released on 2019-05-28. The Xeon E3-1585L v5 is built on Skylake (codename Skylake-H) from the Xeon E3 series, released on 2016-05-30. Both use a 14 nm process node from Intel, but the die sizes differ: the E-2276M has a die size of 154 mm², while the E3-1585L v5 has a die size of 171 mm². The E3-1585L v5 has a stated transistor count of 2,300 million; the E-2276M does not have a transistor count listed in the data.

The core count difference (6 versus 4) and L3 cache difference (12 MB versus 8 MB) are the most prominent architectural contrasts. The E-2276M's newer Coffee Lake design brings a higher boost clock and a smaller die, while the E3-1585L v5's Skylake design, despite being older, demonstrates better benchmark performance. The integrated graphics also reflect the generation gap: UHD Graphics P630 on the E-2276M versus Iris Pro Graphics P580 on the E3-1585L v5. Both processors are end-of-life, and both are aimed at the server/workstation market segment.

Where Each One Wins

The E3-1585L v5 wins everywhere in the provided benchmark suite. It leads in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both multi-core and single-core, by approximately 21.5% in every instance. This makes it the clear choice for compute-heavy workloads that rely on CPU rendering or simulation, as measured by Cinebench. Its consistency across all versions of the test suggests a strong per-core efficiency that compensates for its lower core count and older architecture.

The E-2276M, however, has a few notable advantages that do not show up in the head-to-head results. Its higher boost clock of 4.70 GHz could benefit bursty, short-duration workloads, though the benchmark data does not confirm this. Its larger L3 cache (12 MB versus 8 MB) and higher memory bandwidth (42.7 GB/s versus 34.1 GB/s) may help in memory-intensive applications, and its support for DDR4 exclusively could simplify platform design for newer systems. The E-2276M also has a slightly higher average benchmark score (1996 versus 1989), suggesting that its Geekbench results, which are not available for the E3-1585L v5, are strong enough to offset the Cinebench deficits.

In practical terms, the E3-1585L v5 is the winner for any user whose primary concern is the CPU-bound performance measured by Cinebench. The E-2276M is the better choice for a newer platform with higher memory bandwidth and a more modern feature set, but the data shows it will trail the E3-1585L v5 in raw compute benchmarks by a consistent margin.