Intel Xeon E3-1270 v5 vs Intel Xeon E3-1275 v5 Comparison
Intel Xeon E3-1270 v5
Xeon E3-1275 v5
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: Intel Xeon E3-1270 v5 vs Intel Xeon E3-1275 v5
The Intel Xeon E3-1270 v5 and Intel Xeon E3-1275 v5 are near-identical Skylake server processors, with the benchmark data showing the E3-1270 v5 holding a slight but consistent edge across every tested workload. Across all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, the E3-1270 v5 wins outright, with the largest margin being a 0.2% advantage in multi-core and single-core R20 and R23 tests. The E3-1275 v5 trails by the same narrow margins in five of six tests, and ties in the R15 single-core run. The average benchmark scores reinforce this: the E3-1270 v5 scores 2048, while the E3-1275 v5 scores 2043, a difference of 0.2%. This is a case where the presence of integrated graphics on one part does not translate into a compute performance advantage.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The most decisive separation occurs in the Cinebench R20 and R23 suites, where the E3-1270 v5 leads by 0.2% in both multi-core and single-core tests. In R20 multi-core, the E3-1270 v5 scores 2974 against 2967 for the E3-1275 v5; in R20 single-core, it scores 419 against 418. The R23 results follow the same pattern: 7082 versus 7065 in multi-core and 999 versus 997 in single-core. These are the largest deltas of the comparison, yet they remain within a rounding error of one another. The Cinebench R15 multi-core test shows a 0.1% lead for the E3-1270 v5, with scores of 713 and 712. The single-core R15 test is a dead heat, with both parts scoring 100.
The direction of the results is uniform: the E3-1270 v5 wins all six head-to-head tests, and the E3-1275 v5 wins none. However, the magnitude of that dominance is almost negligible. A 0.2% delta in R20 and R23 means the E3-1270 v5 completes a render in roughly the same time as the E3-1275 v5. The data shows that the E3-1275 v5 is not a slower chip in any meaningful sense; it is the same silicon with an added graphics unit, and the benchmark deltas are likely within run-to-run variance. The percentile ranking also reflects this parity: the E3-1270 v5 sits in the 46th percentile of all CPUs, while the E3-1275 v5 sits in the 45th percentile. The nearest rival list for the E3-1270 v5 includes the E3-1275 v5 with a deltaPct of 0.2%, while the E3-1275 v5's rival list includes the E3-1270 v5 with a deltaPct of -0.2%. Both chips are effectively tied in the broader CPU landscape.
The Verdict
The data is clear: the Intel Xeon E3-1270 v5 is the faster processor in every benchmark recorded. If raw compute is the only criterion, the E3-1270 v5 is the pick, with a 0.2% lead in the R20 and R23 multi-core tests and a 0.1% lead in R15 multi-core. Its average benchmark score of 2048 is 5 points higher than the E3-1275 v5's 2043. However, that advantage is so small that it will be imperceptible in real-world workloads. The E3-1275 v5, despite losing every head-to-head test, is not a meaningful downgrade in performance. The deciding factor between these two is not the benchmark scores but the integrated graphics. The E3-1275 v5 includes HD Graphics P530, while the E3-1270 v5 has no integrated graphics.
For a system that requires a display output without a discrete GPU, the E3-1275 v5 is the only choice, as the E3-1270 v5 cannot drive a display on its own. For a server or workstation with a dedicated graphics card, the E3-1270 v5 offers a marginal compute win and a lower launch MSRP of $339 versus $350 for the E3-1275 v5. Strictly from the data, the E3-1270 v5 wins on performance and launch MSRP, but the E3-1275 v5 wins on feature completeness. The verdict depends on whether the integrated graphics unit is a requirement. If it is, the E3-1275 v5 is the only viable option; if it is not, the E3-1270 v5 is the marginally better performer.
FAQ
Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?
A: The Intel Xeon E3-1270 v5 has an average benchmark score of 2048, while the Intel Xeon E3-1275 v5 has an average score of 2043, a difference of 0.2%.
Q: What is the largest performance delta between the two in any single test?
A: The largest delta is 0.2%, occurring in the Cinebench R20 multi-core (2974 vs 2967), R20 single-core (419 vs 418), R23 multi-core (7082 vs 7065), and R23 single-core (999 vs 997) tests.
Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?
A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon E3-1270 v5 and the Intel Xeon E3-1275 v5 support ECC memory.
Q: What is the difference in integrated graphics?
A: The Intel Xeon E3-1275 v5 includes HD Graphics P530, while the Intel Xeon E3-1270 v5 has no integrated graphics.
Q: What are the launch MSRP values?
A: The Intel Xeon E3-1270 v5 has a launch MSRP of $339, and the Intel Xeon E3-1275 v5 has a launch MSRP of $350.
Q: In how many head-to-head tests does the E3-1275 v5 win?
A: The E3-1275 v5 wins zero head-to-head tests; the E3-1270 v5 wins all six.
Specification Differences
The two processors share nearly every specification, with the sole exception being the integrated graphics unit. Both have 4 cores and 8 threads, a base clock of 3.60 GHz, a boost clock of 4.00 GHz, and an 80 W TDP. They use the same Intel Socket 1151, are built on the 14 nm process node, and have a die size of 122 mm² with 1,750 million transistors. The cache hierarchy is identical: 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. Memory support is the same, with DDR3 and DDR4 over a dual-channel bus delivering 34.1 GB/s. Both support ECC memory and PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The production status is end-of-life for both, with the same release date of 2015-10-18. The launch MSRP differs: $339 for the E3-1270 v5 and $350 for the E3-1275 v5. The part numbers also differ: SR2LF for the E3-1270 v5 and SR2LKSR2CT for the E3-1275 v5. The integrated graphics field is null for the E3-1270 v5 and HD Graphics P530 for the E3-1275 v5. That is the complete list of differences.
Architecture Differences
From an architecture standpoint, the two processors are identical. Both are built on the Skylake architecture, with the codename Skylake-DT, and belong to the Xeon E3 (Skylake-DT) generation. The process node, foundry, transistor count, and die size are all the same: 14 nm, Intel, 1,750 million transistors, and 122 mm². The core and thread counts match at 4 and 8, and the cache layout is unchanged, with 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3. Memory support is identical, with DDR3 and DDR4 over a dual-channel bus. Both have ECC memory support and PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes. The only architectural difference is the presence of the HD Graphics P530 on the E3-1275 v5, which is not a compute architecture change but an added functional block. The E3-1270 v5 has no integrated graphics unit. The TDP remains 80 W for both, indicating that the graphics unit does not increase the thermal envelope. The multiplier is locked on both parts, and they share the same socket and market segment of Server/Workstation.
Where Each One Wins
The Intel Xeon E3-1270 v5 wins in every compute benchmark recorded. Its advantages are consistent but small: 0.1% in Cinebench R15 multi-core, 0.2% in R20 multi-core, 0.2% in R20 single-core, 0.2% in R23 multi-core, and 0.2% in R23 single-core. It also has a higher average benchmark score (2048 vs 2043) and a higher percentile ranking (46th vs 45th). For workloads that rely purely on CPU rendering or multi-threaded computation, the E3-1270 v5 is the marginally better performer. It also carries a lower launch MSRP of $339, which is a spec difference, not a performance claim.
The Intel Xeon E3-1275 v5 wins in one specific scenario: systems that need integrated graphics. With HD Graphics P530, it can output to a display without a discrete GPU, which the E3-1270 v5 cannot do at all. This makes the E3-1275 v5 the only option for a compact server or workstation build that skips a dedicated graphics card. In every benchmark, it is within 0.2% of the E3-1270 v5, so the performance penalty for having the graphics unit is effectively zero. For any use case where a discrete GPU is present, the E3-1270 v5 is the better pick. For any use case where a discrete GPU is absent and a display output is required, the E3-1275 v5 is the only logical choice. The data shows no other meaningful distinction between the two.