Intel Xeon E-2414 vs Intel Xeon E5-1650 v4 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E5-1650 v4 and the Intel Xeon E-2414 sit almost on top of each other in the database rankings, separated by a hair in average benchmark score (2978 versus 2905) and by a single percentile point in overall standing (52 versus 51). Yet the recorded results show a clean sweep for the newer chip: the E-2414 wins all six head-to-head tests, in both single-core and multi-core workloads, by margins of roughly 4 to 5 percent. The older processor counters with more threads, a wider memory bus, and far more PCIe lanes, which matters for workstation and server builds in ways raw Cinebench scores do not capture.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Every Cinebench comparison in the database favors the Intel Xeon E-2414. In Cinebench R15, the E-2414 posts 1012 multi-core points against 966 for the E5-1650 v4, a 4.5 percent gap, and 142 single-core points against 136, a 4.2 percent gap. Cinebench R20 repeats the pattern: 4219 versus 4028 in multi-core and 595 versus 568 in single-core, both a 4.5 percent advantage for the E-2414. Cinebench R23, the heaviest render test in the set, lands at 10046 versus 9592 multi-core and 1418 versus 1354 single-core, again a 4.5 percent margin in both directions.

What makes this sweep notable is the thread count. The E5-1650 v4 brings 6 cores and 12 threads to the fight, while the E-2414 has 4 cores and 4 threads with no hyper-threading. Despite having half the logical processors, the Raptor Lake part still finishes ahead in every multi-core test. That is the effect of its much higher boost clock, 4.50 versus 4.00, doing the work that thread count would otherwise provide. The single-core wins follow the same logic: a newer architecture clocked higher beats an older one clocked lower, and the database shows that consistently across three Cinebench generations.

There is a Geekbench entry for the E5-1650 v4 (6060 multi-core, 1122 single-core) but no corresponding Geekbench data for the E-2414, so no direct comparison can be drawn there. For context against the wider field, the E5-1650 v4's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 5675U and the Intel Xeon E-2334, both within 0.3 percent of its average score, while the E-2414 measures essentially level with the Intel Core i5-1335UE and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1600, both within 0.1 percent. In practical terms, both processors deliver near-identical aggregate performance, but the E-2414 distributes its advantage evenly across every test.

Architecture Differences

These two chips come from different eras of Intel silicon. The E5-1650 v4 is a Broadwell-EP design on a 14 nm process, while the E-2414 is a Raptor Lake-S design on a 10 nm process. The E5-1650 v4 packs 3400 million transistors onto a 246 mm² die; the E-2414 uses a smaller 163 mm² die, and the database records no transistor count for it.

The core configurations diverge sharply. The E5-1650 v4 runs 6 cores and 12 threads at a 3.60 base clock and a 4.00 boost clock, with 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core plus 15 MB of shared L3. The E-2414 runs 4 cores and 4 threads at a 2.60 base clock but boosts to 4.50, with 80 KB of L1 and a much larger 1.25 MB of L2 per core, plus 12 MB of shared L3. The newer chip trades the older one's thread count for bigger per-core caches and higher peak clocks, and the benchmark data suggests that trade pays off.

Platform connectivity is where the gap reverses. The E5-1650 v4 offers PCIe Gen 3 with 40 CPU lanes, quad-channel DDR4 and 76.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The E-2414 offers PCIe Gen 5 with only 16 CPU lanes, dual-channel DDR5 and the same 76.8 GB/s of rated bandwidth. Both support ECC memory, which matters for workstation and server duty. Neither has integrated graphics. The sockets are incompatible: Intel Socket 2011-3 for the old chip, Intel Socket 1700 for the new one, so this is a platform choice as much as a CPU choice. TDP also differs enormously, 140 watts for the E5-1650 v4 against 55 watts for the E-2414, meaning very different cooling requirements. The E5-1650 v4 is end-of-life with a 2016 release date, while the E-2414 is an active product released in 2023. Both launched at a stated launch MSRP: $621 for the E5-1650 v4 and $225 for the E-2414.

The Verdict

On pure benchmark numbers, the data gives the Intel Xeon E-2414 the win across the board: six tests, six victories, margins between 4.2 and 4.5 percent. It does this while drawing 55 watts instead of 140, on a current socket, with current DDR5 memory support. For anyone whose workload looks like the Cinebench suite, lightly threaded or moderately parallel rendering, the E-2414 is the better pick, full stop.

The E5-1650 v4 earns its keep in a different scenario. Its 12 threads beat the E-2414's 4 in principle, and although the recorded Cinebench results do not show that translating into a win, the database also shows the Broadwell part holding a large platform advantage: 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes against 16 Gen 5 lanes, and a quad-channel memory bus against dual-channel. A build with multiple add-in cards, storage controllers, or a dual-GPU editing rig can actually use those lanes. If the machine already exists, the E5-1650 v4's 52nd percentile standing means it remains a mid-pack performer by current standards.

Neither chip is unlocked, so neither is a tuning candidate. Both support ECC, so both fit reliability-focused builds on their respective platforms.

Specification Differences

• Cores and threads: 6 cores / 12 threads on the E5-1650 v4 versus 4 cores / 4 threads on the E-2414.
• Clocks: 3.60 base / 4.00 boost versus 2.60 base / 4.50 boost.
• TDP: 140 watts versus 55 watts.
• Socket: Intel Socket 2011-3 versus Intel Socket 1700.
• Architecture and node: Broadwell-EP on 14 nm versus Raptor Lake-S on 10 nm.
• Die size: 246 mm² versus 163 mm².
• Cache: 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core with 15 MB shared L3 versus 80 KB L1 and 1.25 MB L2 per core with 12 MB shared L3.
• Memory: quad-channel DDR4 versus dual-channel DDR5, both at 76.8 GB/s rated bandwidth, both ECC-capable.
• PCIe: Gen 3 with 40 CPU lanes versus Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes.
• Status: end-of-life (2016) versus active (2023).
• Market segment: Desktop versus Server/Workstation.
• Launch MSRP: $621 versus $225.
• Part numbers: SR2P7 versus SRMXD.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in Cinebench R23? A: The Intel Xeon E-2414, with 10046 multi-core and 1418 single-core points versus 9592 and 1354 for the E5-1650 v4, a 4.5 percent lead in both tests.

Q: Can the Xeon E-2414's 4 threads beat the E5-1650 v4's 12 threads? A: Yes, in the recorded data. The E-2414 wins every multi-core Cinebench test by about 4.5 percent, helped by its 4.50 boost clock and larger 1.25 MB per-core L2 cache.

Q: Which one uses less power? A: The E-2414, by a wide margin: its TDP is 55 watts against 140 watts for the E5-1650 v4.

Q: Do they use the same motherboard? A: No. The E5-1650 v4 fits Intel Socket 2011-3 with DDR4, and the E-2414 fits Intel Socket 1700 with DDR5. There is no overlap.

Q: Which has more PCIe lanes? A: The E5-1650 v4, with 40 CPU lanes of PCIe Gen 3 versus 16 lanes of PCIe Gen 5 on the E-2414.

Q: Is either CPU still in production? A: The E-2414 is an active product. The E5-1650 v4 is end-of-life.

Where Each One Wins

Pick the Xeon E-2414 for: Cinebench-style rendering and general throughput. It wins all six head-to-head tests, leads by 4.2 to 4.5 percent everywhere, matches the E5-1650 v4's memory bandwidth rating on a modern DDR5 platform, and does all of it at 55 watts on an active socket with PCIe Gen 5 for a fast GPU. Buyers who need the best single- and multi-core performance of this pairing get it here.

Pick the Xeon E5-1650 v4 for: Expansion-heavy workstation builds. Its 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, quad-channel memory bus, 12 threads and 15 MB of shared L3 suit systems with many add-in cards or heavily parallel duties that the Cinebench suite may not fully represent. It also sits at the 52nd percentile against all CPUs in the database, effectively tied with rivals like the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 5675U and Intel Xeon E-2334, so it remains a viable mid-range performer for a platform already built around Socket 2011-3.