CPU Comparison
Intel Xeon E-2278GEL
Xeon E5-1650 v4
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: Intel Xeon E-2278GEL vs Intel Xeon E5-1650 v4
The Intel Xeon E5-1650 v4 and the Intel Xeon E-2278GEL represent two distinct philosophies for workstation processing, separated by three years of platform evolution. The E5-1650 v4, a Broadwell-EP part launched in 2016, was designed for the high-end desktop and entry-level workstation segment with a massive 140W TDP and quad-channel memory support. The E-2278GEL, a Coffee Lake-S WS part from 2019, targets the opposite end of the spectrum: a 35W low-power server/workstation processor with integrated graphics. Benchmark data shows the newer, lower-power chip consistently outperforms the older high-power part across every Cinebench test, despite having fewer PCIe lanes and a narrower memory bus. The average benchmark scores are nearly identical, 2978 for the E5-1650 v4 versus 2956 for the E-2278GEL, but the distribution of wins heavily favors the latter.
FAQ
Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?
A: The Intel Xeon E-2278GEL has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Xeon E5-1650 v4 has 6 cores and 12 threads. This gives the E-2278GEL a two-core and four-thread advantage in multi-threaded workloads.
Q: How do the two chips compare in single-core performance?
A: The E-2278GEL leads in every single-core benchmark. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 1442 versus 1354 for the E5-1650 v4, a 6.1% advantage. The gap is consistent across R15 (145 vs 136) and R20 (605 vs 568), all favoring the E-2278GEL.
Q: What is the TDP difference, and does it impact performance?
A: The E5-1650 v4 has a TDP of 140W, while the E-2278GEL is rated at just 35W. Despite drawing significantly less power, the E-2278GEL wins all six head-to-head benchmarks, making it the more efficient performer in this comparison.
Q: Do these processors support ECC memory?
A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon E5-1650 v4 and the Intel Xeon E-2278GEL support ECC memory. This is a key feature for workstation and server reliability, present on both platforms.
Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?
A: Only the Intel Xeon E-2278GEL features integrated graphics, specifically the UHD Graphics P630. The E5-1650 v4 has no integrated graphics, requiring a discrete GPU for display output.
Q: How close are the average benchmark scores of these two CPUs?
A: The average benchmark scores are nearly identical. The E5-1650 v4 scores 2978, while the E-2278GEL scores 2956. According to the nearestRivals data, the E5-1650 v4 is 0.8% ahead of the E-2278GEL in average score, a negligible difference.
The Verdict
The benchmark data presents a clear verdict: the Intel Xeon E-2278GEL is the superior processor for raw compute performance. It wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, with margins ranging from 6.1% to 6.2% over the E5-1650 v4. This is a decisive sweep. The E-2278GEL achieves this with 8 cores versus 6, a higher 3.90 GHz boost clock compared to 4.00 GHz, and a dramatically lower 35W TDP versus 140W. The data suggests that for any workload measured by Cinebench, rendering, multi-threaded content creation, or single-threaded tasks, the E-2278GEL is the pick.
The only area where the E5-1650 v4 holds a theoretical advantage is platform connectivity. It offers 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes and quad-channel memory with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth, versus 16 lanes and dual-channel 42.7 GB/s on the E-2278GEL. However, the benchmark results show this does not translate into a performance win in the tested CPU-bound scenarios. For users prioritizing maximum memory bandwidth or extensive PCIe expansion, the E5-1650 v4's platform is a consideration. For everyone else, the E-2278GEL is the obvious choice: it is faster, newer, runs cooler, and features integrated graphics. The E5-1650 v4's 0.8% average score lead over the E-2278GEL is within the noise of benchmark variance and does not reflect its losses in every individual test.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The E-2278GEL dominates every single benchmark in the comparison, a remarkable feat given its far lower power envelope. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the E-2278GEL scores 1030 against 966 for the E5-1650 v4, a 6.2% win. The R15 single-core test shows a similar story: 145 versus 136, again a 6.2% margin. Moving to Cinebench R20, the E-2278GEL extends its lead in multi-core with a score of 4292 versus 4028, and in single-core with 605 versus 568 (6.1% and 6.2% deltas, respectively). The pattern holds in Cinebench R23, where the E-2278GEL posts 10220 multi-core and 1442 single-core, beating the E5-1650 v4's 9592 and 1354 by 6.1% in both cases.
The consistency of the 6.1-6.2% delta across all six tests is telling. It suggests a fundamental per-core efficiency advantage for the Coffee Lake architecture, rather than a workload-specific quirk. The E5-1650 v4's higher 4.00 GHz boost clock cannot overcome the architectural and core-count deficit. While the E5-1650 v4 does have a higher average benchmark score (2978) compared to the E-2278GEL (2956), this is due to the inclusion of Geekbench scores in its average, which are not present in the head-to-head data. In the direct Cinebench comparison, the E-2278GEL is the clear winner across the board, taking 6 wins to 0.
Specification Differences
The two processors differ significantly in their core specifications. The E5-1650 v4 offers 6 cores and 12 threads, while the E-2278GEL doubles the core count to 8 and threads to 16. The base clock is a stark contrast: the E5-1650 v4 runs at 3.60 GHz, while the E-2278GEL has a much lower 2.00 GHz base. However, the boost clocks are closer, with the E5-1650 v4 at 4.00 GHz and the E-2278GEL at 3.90 GHz. The TDP is the most dramatic difference, with the E5-1650 v4 drawing 140W versus just 35W for the E-2278GEL.
Memory support also diverges. The E5-1650 v4 uses a quad-channel memory bus with a theoretical bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, while the E-2278GEL is limited to dual-channel with 42.7 GB/s. Both support DDR4 and ECC memory. The PCIe configurations differ as well: the E5-1650 v4 provides 40 Gen 3 lanes, whereas the E-2278GEL offers only 16 Gen 3 lanes. The E-2278GEL includes integrated UHD Graphics P630, a feature absent from the E5-1650 v4. Finally, the E5-1650 v4 has a larger die size of 246 mm², compared to 180 mm² for the E-2278GEL, and the E5-1650 v4 contains 3,400 million transistors, a figure not listed for the E-2278GEL.
Architecture Differences
The architectural divide is foundational. The E5-1650 v4 is built on the Broadwell-EP architecture (codename Broadwell-EP), part of the Xeon E5 generation, while the E-2278GEL uses the Coffee Lake architecture (codename Coffee Lake-S WS), from the Xeon E-2200 series. Both are manufactured on Intel's 14 nm process node at Intel's foundry, but the designs are generations apart. The E5-1650 v4 was released in 2016, while the E-2278GEL launched in 2019, reflecting three years of microarchitectural improvements in the interim.
The cache hierarchy differs in the L3, where the E5-1650 v4 has 15 MB shared, while the E-2278GEL has 16 MB shared. The L1 and L2 caches are identical at 64 KB per core and 256 KB per core, respectively. The E5-1650 v4 uses the Intel Socket 2011-3 platform, whereas the E-2278GEL uses the Intel Socket 1151. The memory bus architecture is a key difference, with the E5-1650 v4 supporting quad-channel memory versus dual-channel for the E-2278GEL, directly impacting the theoretical memory bandwidth figures. The E-2278GEL's integrated UHD Graphics P630 is a major architectural feature, enabling systems without a discrete GPU, which the E5-1650 v4 cannot do. The transistor count for the E5-1650 v4 is listed at 3,400 million, but no transistor count is provided for the E-2278GEL.