Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3 vs Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 and the Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3 are both 4-core, 8-thread server processors, but they represent two very different design philosophies within Intel’s Xeon lineup. The E3-1558L v5 is a low-power, BGA-mounted Skylake part with integrated graphics, while the E3-1231 v3 is a higher-clocked, socketed Haswell part. Benchmark data from the database shows that the newer Skylake chip wins every recorded head-to-head test, despite its significantly lower base and boost clocks. This analysis breaks down the architectural changes, the specification differences, and the measured performance deltas to clarify which processor suits which workload.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3 has a higher average benchmark score of 1925, compared to the Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5’s average of 1882. Despite this, the E3-1558L v5 wins every individual Cinebench test in the head-to-head comparison.

Q: How do the two processors compare in single-core Cinebench R23 performance?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 scores 918 points, which is 9% ahead of the Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3’s score of 842 points in the Cinebench R23 single-core test.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two chips?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 has a TDP of 45 watts, while the Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3 has a TDP of 80 watts. This indicates a substantial power efficiency advantage for the newer Skylake part.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 and the Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3 support ECC memory, which is a key feature for server and workstation stability.

Q: Which processor includes integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 includes Iris Pro Graphics P555, while the Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3 has no integrated graphics listed in the database.

Q: Are both processors still in production?

A: No, both are listed as end-of-life. The Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 was released in 2016, while the Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3 was released in 2014.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two Xeon processors is significant, spanning two distinct Intel microarchitectures and process nodes. The Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 is built on the Skylake architecture using a 14 nm process node, while the Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3 is based on the older Haswell architecture on a 22 nm process node. This process shrink is a primary driver of the E3-1558L v5’s efficiency gains, allowing it to deliver higher performance at a much lower TDP.

The transistor counts reflect this generational shift. The E3-1558L v5 packs 2,300 million transistors on a die size of 171 mm², whereas the E3-1231 v3 contains 1,400 million transistors on a slightly smaller 160 mm² die. The higher transistor density of the Skylake part enables more complex logic and features within the same physical footprint.

Memory support is another critical architectural divergence. The E3-1558L v5 supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory, while the E3-1231 v3 is limited to DDR3. This translates into a higher theoretical memory bandwidth for the newer chip: 34.1 GB/s versus 25.6 GB/s for the Haswell part. Both use a dual-channel memory bus, but the newer memory controller is clearly more capable.

The integrated graphics situation also differs sharply. The E3-1558L v5 features Iris Pro Graphics P555, giving it a built-in display and compute capability. The E3-1231 v3 has no integrated graphics at all, meaning it requires a discrete GPU for any visual output. The socket types also differ: the E3-1558L v5 uses a BGA 1440 package, which is soldered to the motherboard, while the E3-1231 v3 uses the LGA 1150 socket, allowing for traditional socketed installation and upgrades.

Both chips share the same core and thread configuration (4 cores, 8 threads) and identical cache hierarchies: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. They also both support PCIe Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes and both have locked multipliers. However, the architectural improvements in Skylake, particularly in the execution pipeline and memory subsystem, are what allow the E3-1558L v5 to outperform the higher-clocked Haswell chip.

The Verdict

The benchmark data tells a clear story: the Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 is the superior performer across all recorded Cinebench tests. It wins all six head-to-head comparisons, with deltas ranging from 9% to 9.5%. This is despite the E3-1231 v3 having a much higher base clock (3.40 GHz vs 1.90 GHz) and boost clock (3.80 GHz vs 3.30 GHz). The Skylake architecture’s efficiency and higher IPC (instructions per clock) more than compensate for the clock speed deficit.

For users prioritizing raw multi-threaded performance in a server or workstation, the E3-1558L v5 is the clear pick based on the recorded data. In Cinebench R23 multicore, it scores 6508 versus 5967 for the E3-1231 v3, a 9.1% advantage. This pattern holds across every generation of Cinebench tests, from R15 to R23, indicating consistent architectural superiority.

The E3-1231 v3 does have one advantage in the database: its average benchmark score is higher (1925 vs 1882). This is driven by the inclusion of Geekbench scores for the Haswell part, which are not present for the Skylake chip. However, when directly compared on the same Cinebench workloads, the E3-1558L v5 always wins. The E3-1231 v3 also has a higher launch MSRP-adjusted position, but the E3-1558L v5 costs more at launch ($396 vs $250). Given the performance data, the E3-1558L v5 is the better choice for anyone who can accommodate its BGA socket and who values the efficiency of a 45 watt TDP.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two processors, with all other listed fields (cores, threads, L1/L2/L3 cache, PCIe lanes, ECC support, market segment, production status, and unlocked multiplier status) being identical.

• Base Clock: The Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3 has a base clock of 3.40 GHz, while the Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 has a base clock of 1.90 GHz.
• Boost Clock: The Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3 boosts to 3.80 GHz, while the Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 boosts to 3.30 GHz.
• TDP: The Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 has a TDP of 45 watts, versus 80 watts for the Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3.
• Socket: The Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 uses Intel BGA 1440, while the Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3 uses Intel Socket 1150.
• Architecture: The Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 is based on Skylake (Skylake-H), while the Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3 is based on Haswell (Haswell-WS).
• Process Node: The Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 is built on a 14 nm process, versus 22 nm for the Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3.
• Transistors: The Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 contains 2,300 million transistors, while the Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3 contains 1,400 million.
• Die Size: The Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 has a die size of 171 mm², versus 160 mm² for the Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3.
• Memory Support: The Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 supports DDR3 and DDR4, while the Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3 supports only DDR3.
• Memory Bandwidth: The Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 has a memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s, versus 25.6 GB/s for the Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3.
• Integrated Graphics: The Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 includes Iris Pro Graphics P555, while the Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3 has none.
• Release Date: The Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 was released in 2016, while the Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3 was released in 2014.
• Launch MSRP: The Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 had a launch MSRP of $396, while the Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3 was $250.
• Part Number: The Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 is SR2TU, and the Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3 is SR1R5.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 wins all six recorded tests. The margins are consistent, hovering around the 9% mark across both single-core and multi-core workloads. This section details each victory with exact scores and deltas.

In the Cinebench R15 multicore test, the E3-1558L v5 scores 655 points against 601 points for the E3-1231 v3, a 9% lead. The single-core R15 test shows a slightly larger margin, with the E3-1558L v5 scoring 92 versus 84, a 9.5% delta. This early pattern suggests that the Skylake IPC advantage applies to both lightly-threaded and fully-threaded workloads.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the E3-1558L v5 continues its dominance. In the multicore test, it scores 2733 points, beating the E3-1231 v3’s 2506 points by 9.1%. The single-core R20 test also shows a 9.1% advantage, with scores of 385 and 353 respectively. The consistency of the delta across different Cinebench versions indicates that the performance gap is architectural rather than workload-specific.

The most recent tests in the database, Cinebench R23, reinforce the pattern. The E3-1558L v5 scores 6508 in multicore, which is 9.1% ahead of the E3-1231 v3’s 5967. In single-core R23, the E3-1558L v5 scores 918, beating the E3-1231 v3’s 842 by exactly 9%. These results confirm that the E3-1558L v5’s lower clocks are not a liability; the Skylake architecture’s efficiency delivers higher performance at a fraction of the power envelope.

The database also lists Geekbench scores for the E3-1231 v3 (3939 multicore, 1109 single-core), but no comparable Geekbench results are recorded for the E3-1558L v5. Therefore, those scores cannot be used for a direct head-to-head comparison. The only directly comparable metrics are the six Cinebench tests, and the E3-1558L v5 wins every one of them.

For users considering these two chips, the data shows that the E3-1558L v5 is the faster processor in every benchmark where both are measured. Its wins are not marginal; they are consistent 9% to 9.5% advantages. This is a significant margin for two processors with the same core count and cache size, and it underscores the impact of the architectural leap from Haswell to Skylake. The E3-1231 v3’s only claim to superiority in the database is its higher average benchmark score, which is skewed by the inclusion of its Geekbench results, and its lower launch MSRP. On pure computational performance, as measured by Cinebench, the E3-1558L v5 is the definitive winner.