Intel Xeon E3-1285 v4 vs Intel Xeon E3-1535M v5 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E3-1285 v4 and Intel Xeon E3-1535M v5 are both 4-core, 8-thread server and workstation processors from Intel, yet they target different platforms and generations. The recorded data shows a consistent pattern: the E3-1535M v5 wins every single benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, despite having a lower base clock. This outcome raises a question: how does a chip with a 3.50 GHz base clock lose to one with a 2.90 GHz base clock across the board? The answer lies in architecture, memory support, and cache configuration, all of which the database reveals in detail.

The Verdict

The benchmark results are unambiguous. The Intel Xeon E3-1535M v5 outperforms the Intel Xeon E3-1285 v4 in all six recorded Cinebench tests, from R15 multicore to R23 singlecore. The deltas are narrow, ranging from 1.8% to 2.1%, but they are consistent. The E3-1535M v5 achieves an average benchmark score of 1945, while the E3-1285 v4 sits at 1908, a difference of 37 points. The percentile rankings reflect this gap: the E3-1535M v5 lands in the 44th percentile of all CPUs, while the E3-1285 v4 sits at the 43rd.

Who should pick which? The data points to the E3-1535M v5 for anyone prioritizing raw Cinebench performance, as it wins every workload category. However, the E3-1285 v4 is not without its own merits. It carries a higher base clock of 3.50 GHz compared to 2.90 GHz, and it uses the Intel Socket 1150 platform, which is a desktop-oriented socket. The E3-1535M v5 uses Intel BGA 1440, a soldered mobile socket. The E3-1285 v4 also has a lower launch MSRP of $556 versus $623 for the E3-1535M v5. For a system builder with an existing Socket 1150 motherboard, the E3-1285 v4 is the practical choice. For a mobile workstation or a new build where the E3-1535M v5's platform is available, the benchmark data favors the newer Skylake part.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1535M v5 has an average benchmark score of 1945, while the Intel Xeon E3-1285 v4 scores 1908. The E3-1535M v5 leads by 37 points.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the head-to-head tests?

A: The E3-1535M v5 wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests. The deltas are small: 1.9% in R15 multicore, 2.1% in R15 singlecore, 1.9% in R20 multicore, 1.8% in R20 singlecore, 1.9% in R23 multicore, and 1.9% in R23 singlecore.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon E3-1285 v4 and the Intel Xeon E3-1535M v5 have ECC memory support enabled.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth differences?

A: The E3-1285 v4 supports DDR3 memory with a bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s. The E3-1535M v5 supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory, with a higher bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1535M v5 has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Xeon E3-1285 v4 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What are the release dates for these two chips?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1285 v4 was released on 2015-06-01, and the Intel Xeon E3-1535M v5 was released later on 2015-10-26.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations. The E3-1285 v4 is built on the Broadwell architecture, specifically the Broadwell-DT codename, while the E3-1535M v5 uses the Skylake architecture with the Skylake-H codename. Both are fabricated on a 14 nm process node at Intel, but the die sizes differ significantly. The E3-1285 v4 has a die size of 182 mm², while the E3-1535M v5 is smaller at 122 mm². The transistor count for the E3-1535M v5 is listed as 2,300 million, but the E3-1285 v4 has no recorded transistor count in the database.

The cache hierarchy is another differentiator. Both chips have 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core. The shared L3 cache, however, favors the E3-1535M v5 with 8 MB versus 6 MB on the E3-1285 v4. This 2 MB difference in shared cache could contribute to the E3-1535M v5's consistent lead in single-threaded tests, as more cache can reduce memory latency for frequently accessed data.

The integrated graphics also differ. The E3-1285 v4 features Intel Iris Pro P6300, while the E3-1535M v5 has HD Graphics P530. The database does not provide benchmark scores for these iGPUs, so a performance comparison is not possible from the recorded data. The memory controllers are also distinct: the E3-1285 v4 supports only DDR3, while the E3-1535M v5 supports both DDR3 and DDR4. This broader memory support gives the E3-1535M v5 a flexibility advantage for system builders.

Specification Differences

The specification table reveals several key differences between the two processors. The base clock of the E3-1285 v4 is 3.50 GHz, which is higher than the E3-1535M v5's 2.90 GHz. The boost clock is closer: 3.80 GHz for the E3-1285 v4 versus 3.70 GHz for the E3-1535M v5. The thermal design power (TDP) is a major divergence. The E3-1285 v4 has a TDP of 95 watts, while the E3-1535M v5 draws only 45 watts. This makes the E3-1535M v5 significantly more power-efficient, which is expected given its mobile BGA 1440 socket.

The sockets are incompatible: the E3-1285 v4 uses Intel Socket 1150, while the E3-1535M v5 uses Intel BGA 1440. The memory bandwidth is higher on the E3-1535M v5 at 34.1 GB/s versus 29.9 GB/s. The launch MSRP differs as well, with the E3-1285 v4 at $556 and the E3-1535M v5 at $623. Both processors have the same PCIe configuration: Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only). Both are end-of-life products, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The part numbers are SR2CX for the E3-1285 v4 and SR2FM for the E3-1535M v5.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is a clean sweep for the E3-1535M v5. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the E3-1535M v5 scores 677 against 664 for the E3-1285 v4, a delta of 1.9%. The R15 singlecore test shows a similar pattern: 95 versus 93, a 2.1% lead. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multicore scores are 2824 for the E3-1535M v5 and 2770 for the E3-1285 v4, again a 1.9% difference. The R20 singlecore test yields 398 versus 391, a 1.8% gap.

The Cinebench R23 results continue the trend. In multicore, the E3-1535M v5 scores 6726, while the E3-1285 v4 scores 6596, a 1.9% delta. The R23 singlecore test shows 949 versus 931, a 1.9% difference. The largest relative win for the E3-1535M v5 is in R15 singlecore at 2.1%, while the smallest is in R20 singlecore at 1.8%. The consistency of these deltas, all within a narrow band of 1.8% to 2.1%, suggests that the E3-1535M v5's advantage is structural rather than workload-specific.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this picture. The E3-1535M v5 has an average score of 1945, placing it in the 44th percentile of all CPUs. The E3-1285 v4 has an average score of 1908, placing it in the 43rd percentile. The nearest rivals for the E3-1285 v4 include the Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 with an average score of 1907 and a delta of 0%, and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400GE with a score of 1910 and a delta of -0.1%. The E3-1535M v5's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon E3-1230 v5 with a score of 1947 and a delta of -0.1%, and the Intel Core i7-9850HL with a score of 1941 and a delta of 0.2%.

Where Each One Wins

The E3-1535M v5 wins in every benchmark category recorded in the database. It is the clear performance leader in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both singlecore and multicore. Its higher L3 cache of 8 MB, broader memory support for DDR4, and higher memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s likely contribute to this edge. The lower TDP of 45 watts also makes it a more attractive option for power-constrained environments, such as mobile workstations or compact systems.

The E3-1285 v4, despite losing all head-to-head tests, has its own strengths. Its higher base clock of 3.50 GHz could be beneficial in scenarios where sustained all-core loads are less common, though the benchmark data does not show a win in any recorded test. Its lower launch MSRP of $556 makes it a less expensive option at launch, and its Socket 1150 compatibility means it can drop into existing desktop motherboards. The integrated Iris Pro P6300 graphics are a different tier of iGPU compared to the HD Graphics P530, though no benchmark data is available to quantify the difference.

In practical terms, the E3-1535M v5 is the better choice for raw compute performance, as measured by Cinebench. The E3-1285 v4 is the better choice for a platform-specific upgrade path on Socket 1150, or for a build where the lower launch price is a priority. The data does not show any workload where the E3-1285 v4 pulls ahead, so the decision hinges on platform compatibility and power efficiency rather than benchmark scores.