Intel Xeon E3-1285 v4 vs Intel Xeon E3-1575M v5 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E3-1575M v5 and the Intel Xeon E3-1285 v4 are two end-of-life server/workstation processors that, on paper, appear to be separated by platform and generation. Both are 4-core, 8-thread parts with integrated graphics, yet the benchmark data reveals a remarkable performance parity that defies their architectural differences. Across six Cinebench tests, the E3-1575M v5 wins every single head-to-head matchup, but the margins are razor-thin, ranging from 0.1% to 0.2%. This is a comparison defined not by decisive victories, but by the subtle implications of design choices and platform support.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking observation from the benchmark suite is the near-identical performance ceiling of these two processors. In the Cinebench R15 multicore test, the E3-1575M v5 scores 665 against the E3-1285 v4’s 664, a 0.2% advantage. That gap narrows to just 0.1% in Cinebench R20 multicore, where the scores are 2774 and 2770, respectively. The Cinebench R23 multicore test shows a similar pattern, with the E3-1575M v5 posting 6607 versus 6596 for the E3-1285 v4, again a 0.2% lead. These are effectively statistical ties, suggesting that the extra 0.40 GHz of base clock on the E3-1285 v4 is entirely offset by the higher 3.90 GHz boost clock on the E3-1575M v5.

Single-core performance is even more tightly clustered. Both processors score exactly 93 in Cinebench R15 single-core and exactly 391 in Cinebench R20 single-core. The only separation comes in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the E3-1575M v5 edges ahead with 932 versus 931, a 0.1% difference. Across all six benchmarks, the E3-1575M v5 accumulates a clean sweep of wins, but the largest margin is a mere 0.2%. The data indicates that for any practical workload, users would be hard-pressed to feel a difference between these two chips in raw compute throughput.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this narrative. The E3-1575M v5 carries an average score of 1910, while the E3-1285 v4 sits at 1908. In the nearestRivals list, each processor lists the other as a direct competitor with a deltaPct of 0.1% and -0.1%, respectively. Both processors sit at the 43rd percentile of all CPUs, indicating they are mid-pack performers in the broader market. The data shows that the E3-1575M v5 is technically the faster part, but the magnitude of its victory is negligible in every measurable way.

Architecture Differences

Despite the benchmark parity, the two chips are built on different architectural foundations. The E3-1575M v5 uses the Skylake architecture, specifically the Skylake-H codename, built on a 14 nm process node with a die size of 171 mm². The E3-1285 v4 uses the Broadwell architecture, codename Broadwell-DT, also on a 14 nm node but with a slightly larger die size of 182 mm². The transistor count for the E3-1575M v5 is listed at 2,300 million, while no transistor count is provided for the E3-1285 v4. This suggests that the Skylake part packs more transistors into a smaller die, a factor that contributes to its efficiency advantages.

Cache configurations differ notably. Both share 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core, but the L3 cache is where they diverge. The E3-1575M v5 offers 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the E3-1285 v4 is limited to 6 MB. This 2 MB difference could explain the slight edge the E3-1575M v5 holds in the multicore tests, as a larger cache can reduce memory latency for frequently accessed data. The E3-1575M v5 also supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory, while the E3-1285 v4 is restricted to DDR3 only. Memory bandwidth reflects this: the E3-1575M v5 achieves 34.1 GB/s versus 29.9 GB/s for the E3-1285 v4.

Platform integration is a major differentiator. The E3-1575M v5 uses the Intel BGA 1440 socket, which is a mobile-oriented package, and carries a 45 W TDP. The E3-1285 v4 uses the desktop-friendly Intel Socket 1150 and has a much higher 95 W TDP. This means the E3-1575M v5 delivers essentially identical performance at less than half the thermal design power. The integrated graphics also differ: the E3-1575M v5 features Iris Pro Graphics P580, while the E3-1285 v4 has Intel Iris Pro P6300. Both support ECC memory and offer Gen 3 PCIe with 16 lanes from the CPU.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon E3-1575M v5 is the superior processor in every single test performed, but the margins are so small that they border on measurement noise. The E3-1575M v5 wins all six head-to-head benchmarks, yet the largest delta is 0.2%. The E3-1285 v4 never claims a single win. For users prioritizing raw performance, the E3-1575M v5 is the pick, but the advantage is purely academic in real-world terms.

The more compelling argument for the E3-1575M v5 comes from its efficiency profile. Its 45 W TDP versus the 95 W TDP of the E3-1285 v4 is a dramatic difference, and this is achieved while still offering a higher 3.90 GHz boost clock. The E3-1575M v5 also brings a larger 8 MB L3 cache and support for DDR4 memory, which future-proofs it better than the DDR3-only E3-1285 v4. The E3-1285 v4 does have a higher base clock of 3.50 GHz, which could be advantageous in workloads that sustain long-duration all-core loads without boosting, but the benchmark data does not show this translating into any wins.

From a production status perspective, both are end-of-life. The E3-1575M v5 was released in January 2016, while the E3-1285 v4 came earlier in June 2015. The E3-1285 v4 has a launch MSRP of $556, while the E3-1575M v5 has a launch MSRP of $1207. The data provides no performance justification for that price difference, but it does suggest a different target market: the E3-1575M v5 is a mobile BGA part, whereas the E3-1285 v4 is a socketed desktop part. For a system builder with an existing Socket 1150 board, the E3-1285 v4 is the only choice. For a new system, the E3-1575M v5 offers more cache, more memory flexibility, and far lower power draw.

Specification Differences

The table below highlights only the fields where the two processors differ, based on the provided data.

| Specification | Intel Xeon E3-1575M v5 | Intel Xeon E3-1285 v4 |

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

| Base Clock | 3.00 GHz | 3.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.90 GHz | 3.80 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 95 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1440 | Intel Socket 1150 |

| Architecture | Skylake | Broadwell |

| Codename | Skylake-H | Broadwell-DT |

| Generation | Xeon E3 (Skylake-H) | Xeon E3 (Broadwell-DT) |

| Die Size | 171 mm² | 182 mm² |

| Transistors | 2,300 million | Not specified |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR3, DDR4 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 34.1 GB/s | 29.9 GB/s |

| Integrated Graphics | Iris Pro Graphics P580 | Intel Iris Pro P6300 |

| Release Date | 2016-01-23 | 2015-06-01 |

| Launch MSRP | $1207 | $556 |

| Part Number | SR2QV | SR2CX |

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1575M v5 has a boost clock of 3.90 GHz, which is 0.10 GHz higher than the 3.80 GHz boost clock of the Intel Xeon E3-1285 v4.

Q: What is the L3 cache size difference?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1575M v5 features 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Xeon E3-1285 v4 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache, a 2 MB advantage for the former.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon E3-1575M v5 and the Intel Xeon E3-1285 v4 have ECC memory support enabled.

Q: How does the memory bandwidth compare?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1575M v5 achieves a memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s, while the Intel Xeon E3-1285 v4 is rated at 29.9 GB/s.

Q: Which processor won the most head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1575M v5 won all 6 head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the Intel Xeon E3-1285 v4, with the largest margin being 0.2%.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for each chip?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1575M v5 has a TDP of 45 W, while the Intel Xeon E3-1285 v4 has a TDP of 95 W.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon E3-1575M v5 is the clear winner in efficiency and platform flexibility. Its 45 W TDP makes it suitable for compact or thermally constrained systems, and its support for both DDR3 and DDR4 memory gives builders more options. The larger 8 MB L3 cache and higher 34.1 GB/s memory bandwidth provide a structural advantage in data-heavy workloads, even if the benchmark scores show only marginal gains. The 3.90 GHz boost clock is the highest of the two, making it the better choice for bursty, single-threaded tasks that rely on short-duration turbo frequencies. It also offers the newer integrated graphics solution, the Iris Pro Graphics P580.

The Intel Xeon E3-1285 v4 wins in the context of existing platform investment. Its Socket 1150 design means it can drop into older desktop motherboards, whereas the BGA 1440 package of the E3-1575M v5 is soldered and not upgradable. The higher 3.50 GHz base clock is a defining feature; for sustained all-core workloads that run at base frequency for extended periods, the E3-1285 v4 could theoretically maintain a higher floor, though the benchmark data does not show this resulting in any test victory. It also has a significantly lower launch MSRP of $556, which may be a consideration for those looking at used or refurbished markets, though the E3-1575M v5’s $1207 launch price reflects a different market positioning. For a user with a compatible 1150 board, the E3-1285 v4 is the only viable option, and the data shows it is just as capable in practice.