Intel Xeon E3-1270L v4 vs Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clean sweep for the Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 across all six Cinebench comparisons. The E5-2620 v3 wins every single head-to-head test, though the margins are uniformly narrow. The largest advantage appears in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the E5-2620 v3 scores 391 against 385 for the E3-1270L v4, a difference of 1.6%. That is the widest gap in either direction across the entire benchmark set.

In multi-core workloads, the pattern holds with similar tightness. Cinebench R15 multicore shows the E5-2620 v3 at 664 versus 656 for the E3-1270L v4, a 1.2% lead. The Cinebench R20 multicore result repeats that exact 1.2% delta, with scores of 2769 and 2735 respectively. Moving to Cinebench R23 multicore, the E5-2620 v3 posts 6595 against 6512, which is a 1.3% advantage. The single-core tests are equally close: Cinebench R15 singlecore gives the E5-2620 v3 a 93 to 92 win, and Cinebench R23 singlecore shows 931 to 919, a 1.3% lead.

The data indicates that neither processor dominates the other in any meaningful way. The E5-2620 v3 wins all six recorded tests, but the average delta across all of them is roughly 1.3%. This is not a case of one chip being decisively faster; rather, it shows the E5-2620 v3 holds a consistent but small advantage in every measured scenario. The average benchmark score in the database places the E5-2620 v3 at 1907 and the E3-1270L v4 at 1883, a gap of 24 points. Both sit at the 43rd percentile among all CPUs, meaning their overall standing in the database is identical.

Looking at nearest rivals provides context. The E5-2620 v3 sits within 0.2% of the Intel Xeon E3-1285 v4 (average score 1908) and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400GE (1910). The E3-1270L v4 is similarly close to the Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 (1882) and the Intel Xeon D-1531 (1885). Neither chip stands out as an outlier among its peers; both are squarely in the mid-range of the database distribution.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmarks show zero wins for the E3-1270L v4. Every single test, from Cinebench R15 through R23, both single-core and multi-core, favors the E5-2620 v3. This is a straightforward outcome: the six-core, twelve-thread Haswell-EP processor leads in all six head-to-head comparisons.

However, the win is purely nominal in terms of performance. The deltas range from 1.1% to 1.6%, which means no workload in the database would show a perceptible difference to a user. The E5-2620 v3 wins on paper, but its victories are so thin that the E3-1270L v4 effectively matches it in every test. For practical purposes, the two chips are interchangeable across the Cinebench suite.

What separates them is not speed but capacity and efficiency. The E5-2620 v3 offers two more cores and four more threads (6 cores, 12 threads versus 4 cores, 8 threads), yet its benchmark advantage is only about 1.2% in multicore tests. This suggests the E3-1270L v4 uses its higher clocks (3.00 GHz base, 3.60 GHz boost versus 2.40 GHz and 3.20 GHz) to compensate for its fewer cores. The E3-1270L v4 also does so at a much lower TDP: 45 watts versus 85 watts, a 40-watt difference in thermal design point. That is the more consequential split in the data.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel eras and platforms. The E5-2620 v3 is built on the Haswell architecture (codename Haswell-EP), while the E3-1270L v4 uses Broadwell (codename Broadwell-DT). The process node tells the story: the E5-2620 v3 uses Intel's 22 nm process, and the E3-1270L v4 uses the newer 14 nm node. The E5-2620 v3 is fabricated with 2,600 million transistors on a 356 mm² die, while the E3-1270L v4 has a smaller 182 mm² die with no recorded transistor count.

The cache structure reflects the core counts. Both chips share 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core. The L3 cache differs: the E5-2620 v3 has 12 MB shared (the database lists 15 MB shared, which appears to be a typo, but the number in the record is 15 MB), while the E3-1270L v4 has 6 MB shared. That is a 9 MB difference in favor of the E5-2620 v3.

The memory systems diverge sharply. The E5-2620 v3 supports DDR4 memory over a quad-channel bus, with memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The E3-1270L v4 uses DDR3 over a dual-channel bus, delivering 29.9 GB/s. That is exactly half the bandwidth of the E5-2620 v3. Both support ECC memory, but the platform differences extend to sockets: the E5-2620 v3 uses Intel Socket 2011-3, while the E3-1270L v4 uses Socket 1150. PCIe support differs as well, with the E5-2620 v3 providing Gen 3, 40 lanes (CPU only) versus 16 lanes for the E3-1270L v4.

The E5-2620 v3 was released in September 2014 with a launch MSRP of $417. The E3-1270L v4 came later, in June 2015, and has no launch MSRP in the database. The E5-2620 v3 is marked as end-of-life; the E3-1270L v4 has no production status listed. Both are server/workstation parts, and both are locked (no unlocked multiplier).

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in single-core tests?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 wins all three single-core tests. In Cinebench R15 it scores 93 versus 92, in R20 it scores 391 versus 385, and in R23 it scores 931 versus 919. The largest margin is 1.6% in R20.

Q: How big is the multicore performance difference?

A: The E5-2620 v3 leads in all three multicore tests, but by only 1.2% to 1.3%. In R15 it scores 664 to 656, in R20 it scores 2769 to 2735, and in R23 it scores 6595 to 6512.

Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?

A:** The E5-2620 v3 has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the E3-1270L v4 has 4 cores and 8 threads. Despite having 50% more cores, the E5-2620 v3's multicore advantage is only about 1.2% in the recorded benchmarks.

Q: Do these CPUs support ECC memory?

A:** Yes, both support ECC memory. They differ in memory type and bandwidth: the E5-2620 v3 uses quad-channel DDR4 at 59.7 GB/s, and the E3-1270L v4 uses dual-channel DDR3 at 29.9 GB/s.

Q: What are the TDP differences?

A:** The E5-2620 v3 has a TDP of 85 watts, and the E3-1270L v4 has a TDP of 45 watts. The E3-1270L v4 draws considerably less power.

Q: How do they compare to other CPUs in the database?

A:** Both sit at the 43rd percentile among all CPUs. The E5-2620 v3's nearest rival is the Intel Xeon E3-1285 v4 (average score 1908, delta 0%), and the E3-1270L v4's nearest rival is the Intel Xeon D-1531 (average score 1885, delta -0.1%).

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 | Intel Xeon E3-1270L v4 |

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

| Cores | 6 | 4 |

| Threads | 4 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 2.40 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.20 GHz | 3.60 GHz |

| TDP | 85 W | 45 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 | Intel Socket 1150 |

| Architecture | Haswell | Broadwell |

| Codename | Haswell-EP | Broadwell-DT |

| Process Node | 22 nm | 14 nm |

| Die Size | 356 mm² | 182 mm² |

| Transistors | 2,600 million | Not listed |

| L3 Cache | 15 MB shared | 6 MB shared |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR3 |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 59.7 GB/s | 29.9 GB/s |

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

| Release Date | September 2014 | June 2015 |

| Launch MSRP | $417 | Not listed |

| Part Number | SR207 | SR2AZ |

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous but underwhelming: the Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 wins every recorded benchmark by a margin that rarely exceeds 1.3%. If the decision rests solely on Cinebench scores, the E5-2620 v3 is the correct choice, as it leads in all six tests. Users who need the highest possible score in these workloads should pick the E5-2620 v3.

But the E3-1270L v4 makes a stronger argument for efficiency. Its 45 W TDP is less than half of the E5-2620 v3's 85 W. The database shows it matches the E5-2620 v3 within 1.2% in multicore tests despite having fewer cores and a smaller cache. It achieves this with higher clocks (3.00 GHz base, 3.60 GHz boost) on a newer 14 nm process.

The choice depends on the platform. Systems already on Socket 2011-3 with DDR4 memory should stay with the E5-2620 v3. Systems on Socket 1150 with DDR3 memory should use the E3-1270L v4. The E5-2620 v3 offers double the memory bandwidth (59.7 GB/s versus 29.9 GB/s) and more PCIe lanes (40 versus 16), making it better for memory or I/O heavy workloads. The E3-1270L v4 offers lower power draw and a smaller footprint, but its dual-channel DDR3 and reduced PCIe lanes limit its scalability.

Given the nearly identical benchmark scores, the data supports choosing the E5-2620 v3 only if the platform and memory requirements align. The E3-1270L v4 is the clear choice for low-power deployments where the 45% TDP advantage outweighs the 1.3% average performance deficit. Both are 43rd percentile CPUs, so neither offers a tier advantage in the database. The verdict is a tie in practice: buy the one that fits the existing motherboard and memory.