Intel Xeon E-2278G vs Intel Xeon E5-4669 v3 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits these two Xeon processors into very different use cases. The Intel Xeon E5-4669 v3 wins all six recorded head-to-head comparisons, but the margin is surprisingly narrow for a chip with more than double the core count. The E5-4669 v3 leads by roughly 9.7 to 9.8 percent across every Cinebench test, whether single-core or multi-core. That consistency suggests an architectural advantage rather than a raw core-count advantage.

The E5-4669 v3 is the clear choice for heavily threaded workloads. Its 18 cores and 36 threads give it a structural edge in multi-core rendering, and the data confirms this: it scores 1493 in Cinebench R15 multi-core versus 1360 for the E-2278G, a 9.8 percent advantage. The R20 multi-core result shows 6222 versus 5670, and R23 multi-core shows 14815 versus 13502. Each of these margins sits near 9.7 percent, which is notable because the core-count gap is much larger than the performance gap.

The Intel Xeon E-2278G, despite losing every head-to-head test, still wins in efficiency per core and in platform flexibility. Its 8 cores and 16 threads run at a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, compared to 2.10 GHz base and 2.90 GHz boost on the E5-4669 v3. The higher clocks allow it to stay within striking distance in single-core tests, where it scores 192 in R15 single-core versus 210 for the E5-4669 v3, a 9.4 percent gap. The E-2278G also supports integrated graphics with HD Graphics P630, which the E5-4669 v3 lacks entirely. For systems that do not need a discrete GPU, that is a meaningful difference.

The E-2278G also has a lower TDP of 95 watts versus 135 watts for the E5-4669 v3. This makes it easier to cool and more suitable for compact workstation builds. The E5-4669 v3, by contrast, targets large server platforms with its Intel Socket 2011-3 and quad-channel memory support. The recorded data shows a clear split: the E5-4669 v3 wins raw performance, while the E-2278G wins in per-core efficiency, platform simplicity, and integrated feature set.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different eras and different design philosophies. The E5-4669 v3 uses the Haswell-EP architecture on a 22 nm process node, with a die size of 662 mm². The E-2278G uses Coffee Lake-S WS on a 14 nm process, with a die size of 180 mm². The process node difference explains part of the clock speed gap: the newer 14 nm process allows the E-2278G to reach 5.00 GHz boost, while the older 22 nm process tops out at 2.90 GHz.

The core configurations differ substantially. The E5-4669 v3 packs 18 cores and 36 threads, while the E-2278G has 8 cores and 16 threads. The E5-4669 v3 compensates for its lower clocks with a much larger shared L3 cache of 45 MB, versus 16 MB on the E-2278G. Both chips have 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, so the per-core cache hierarchy is identical; the difference lies entirely in the shared L3 pool.

Memory architecture also diverges sharply. The E5-4669 v3 supports quad-channel DDR4 with a memory bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s. The E-2278G is limited to dual-channel DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s. For memory-bound workloads, the E5-4669 v3 has a theoretical bandwidth advantage of roughly 60 percent, which could matter in database or virtualization scenarios even if Cinebench does not show a proportional gap remains tighter than the bandwidth gap suggests.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The E5-4669 v3 provides 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU, while the E-2278G provides 16. This makes the E5-4669 v3 more suitable for multi-GPU configurations or heavy NVMe storage arrays. The E-2278G compensates with integrated HD Graphics P630, a feature absent on the E5-4669 v3. Both chips support ECC memory, so that is not a differentiator.

The sockets are incompatible: the E5-4669 v3 uses Intel Socket 2011-3, while the E-2278G uses Intel Socket 1151. This means platform choice dictates which chip is even viable. The E5-4669 v3 is from the Xeon E5 (Haswell-EP) generation, released in May 2015, while the E-2278G is from the Xeon E (Coffee Lake) series, released in May 2019. Both are now end-of-life, but the E-2278G is four years newer.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite provides a consistent picture across all six recorded tests. The E5-4669 v3 wins every one, but the margins are remarkably uniform. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the E5-4669 v3 scores 1493 against 1360 for the E-2278G, a 9.8 percent lead. In R20 multi-core, the scores are 6222 versus 5670, a 9.7 percent lead. In R23 multi-core, the scores are 14815 versus 13502, again a 9.7 percent lead. The consistency of these margins suggests the E5-4669 v3's extra cores and cache are working as intended, but the E-2278G's higher clocks are mitigating the expected gap.

Single-core tests follow the same pattern. The E5-4669 v3 scores 210 in R15 single-core versus 192, a 9.4 percent lead. In R20 single-core, it scores 878 versus 800, a 9.8 percent lead. In R23 single-core, it scores 2091 versus 1906, a 9.7 percent lead. This is unusual: a processor with a 2.10 GHz base clock and 2.90 GHz boost should normally lose to a chip with a 3.40 GHz base and 5.00 GHz boost in single-core tests. The data shows the opposite, which implies the Haswell-EP architecture has a per-clock instruction throughput advantage over Coffee Lake, or the boost clocks on the E-2278G are not sustained under the test conditions.

The E-2278G has additional Geekbench scores in the database: 7354 multi-core and 1633 single-core. The E5-4669 v3 does not have recorded Geekbench results, so no direct comparison is possible for that test. The average benchmark scores tell a similar story: the E5-4669 v3 averages 4285 across all recorded benchmarks, while the E-2278G averages 4052. The E5-4669 v3 sits at the 58th percentile of all CPUs, while the E-2278G sits at the 57th percentile. These are nearly identical percentiles, which is remarkable given the core-count and price differences.

The nearest rivals for each chip provide context. The E5-4669 v3's nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5750G at an average score of 4296, a 0.3 percent difference. The E-2278G's nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X at 4073, a 0.5 percent difference. This places both chips in the same performance tier despite their architectural differences.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-4669 v3 has 18 cores and 36 threads, while the Intel Xeon E-2278G has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Does the E-2278G ever beat the E5-4669 v3 in any recorded benchmark?

A: No. The E5-4669 v3 wins all six recorded Cinebench tests, with margins between 9.4 and 9.8 percent. The E-2278G does have Geekbench scores recorded, but the E5-4669 v3 has no Geekbench results for comparison.

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: The E5-4669 v3 has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 2.90 GHz. The E-2278G has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz.

Q: Which chip supports more memory bandwidth?

A: The E5-4669 v3 supports quad-channel DDR4 with 68.3 GB/s bandwidth. The E-2278G supports dual-channel DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s.

Q: Does either chip have integrated graphics?

A: The E-2278G includes HD Graphics P630. The E5-4669 v3 has no integrated graphics.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The E5-4669 v3 averages 4285 across all recorded benchmarks, placing at the 58th percentile. The E-2278G averages 4052, placing at the 57th percentile.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but nuanced conclusion. The Intel Xeon E5-4669 v3 is the faster processor in every recorded benchmark, with a consistent 9.7 percent lead across the Cinebench suite. It achieves this with 18 cores versus 8, a 45 MB L3 cache versus 16 MB, and quad-channel memory versus dual-channel. Its 58th percentile ranking versus the E-2278G's 57th percentile confirms that the overall performance tier is nearly identical, but the E5-4669 v3 is slightly ahead.

The E-2278G is the better choice for scenarios where platform simplicity matters more than raw multi-core output. Its 95 watt TDP makes it easier to integrate into standard Socket 1151 motherboards, its integrated graphics remove the need for a discrete GPU, and its 5.00 GHz boost clock demonstrates that high-frequency operation is still viable in a workstation form factor. The dual-channel memory limitation and 16 PCIe lanes are acceptable for many workstation tasks, even if they fall short of the E5-4669 v3's server-class connectivity.

For anyone building a system around heavy multi-threaded rendering, virtualization, or memory-bandwidth-sensitive workloads, the E5-4669 v3 is the stronger option. Its 68.3 GB/s memory bandwidth and 40 PCIe lanes support larger configurations. The 9.7 percent performance advantage in Cinebench R23 multi-core (14815 versus 13502) is modest relative to the core-count gap, but it is consistent and measurable.

The launch MSRP of the E5-4669 v3 is $7007, while the E-2278G has a launch MSRP of $494. The performance gap does not reflect that price difference, which suggests the E-2278G is a more practical choice for most users. The E5-4669 v3 belongs in systems that need its memory bandwidth, PCIe capacity, and core count for specific server workloads, not for general-purpose computing.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon E5-4669 v3 | Intel Xeon E-2278G |

|-------------------------------|------------------------------|------------------------------|

| Cores | 18 | 8 |

| Threads | 36 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 2.10 GHz | 3.40 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 2.90 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 135 W | 95 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 | Intel Socket 1151 |

| Architecture | Haswell-EP | Coffee Lake-S WS |

| Process Node | 22 nm | 14 nm |

| Die Size | 662 mm² | 180 mm² |

| L3 Cache | 45 MB (shared) | 16 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bus | Quad-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 68.3 GB/s | 42.7 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 40 Lanes | Gen 3, 16 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | None | HD Graphics P630 |

| Release Date | 2015-05-31 | 2019-05-28 |

| Launch MSRP | $7007 | $494 |

| Part Number | SR22M QH9B | SRFB2 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 4285 | 4052 |

| Percentile vs All CPUs | 58 | 57 |