Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 vs Intel Xeon E5-2637 v3 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 and Intel Xeon E5-2637 v3 are both 4-core, 8-thread server/workstation processors, but they come from different generations and platforms. The database records six head-to-head Cinebench comparisons, and the E3-1505M v5 wins all six. However, the E5-2637 v3 counters with a larger L3 cache, quad-channel memory, and more PCIe lanes. This analysis walks through the benchmark results, architecture differences, and specification gaps to clarify where each processor stands.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data covers three Cinebench versions, each with single-core and multi-core tests. The Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 wins every one of the six comparisons. The largest margin is in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the E3-1505M v5 scores 633 against the E5-2637 v3's 617, a 2.6% advantage. The smallest margin is in Cinebench R15 single-core, with 89 versus 87, a 2.3% lead. The remaining four tests all show a 2.5% delta in favor of the E3-1505M v5: Cinebench R20 multi-core (2639 vs 2574), R20 single-core (372 vs 363), R23 multi-core (6284 vs 6130), and R23 single-core (887 vs 865).

These deltas are consistent and narrow, indicating that the two processors are closely matched in raw CPU throughput. The E3-1505M v5's average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 1817, placing it in the 42nd percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core i5-6600K, scores 1816, a 0.1% difference. The E5-2637 v3 averages 1773, in the 41st percentile, with its closest rival, the Intel Xeon E5-4610 v3, at 1777, a 0.2% gap. The head-to-head results show that the E3-1505M v5 holds a small but consistent edge in every Cinebench workload, while the E5-2637 v3 trails by roughly 2.5% in most tests.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 scores 887, while the Intel Xeon E5-2637 v3 scores 865. The E3-1505M v5 leads by 2.5%.

Q: Does the E5-2637 v3 have a larger L3 cache?

A: Yes. The E5-2637 v3 has 15 MB of shared L3 cache, while the E3-1505M v5 has 8 MB. Both have 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core.

Q: Which processor supports quad-channel memory?

A: The E5-2637 v3 supports quad-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s. The E3-1505M v5 supports dual-channel DDR3 or DDR4 with a bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s.

Q: Does the E3-1505M v5 include integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it has HD Graphics P530. The E5-2637 v3 has no integrated graphics.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The E3-1505M v5 has a TDP of 45 watts, while the E5-2637 v3 has a TDP of 135 watts.

Q: Which processor has more PCIe lanes?

A: The E5-2637 v3 provides 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes (CPU only), while the E3-1505M v5 provides 16 lanes.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different microarchitectures and process nodes. The E3-1505M v5 is built on Skylake (Skylake-H) using a 14 nm process, while the E5-2637 v3 is Haswell (Haswell-EP) on a 22 nm process. The E3-1505M v5 integrates 2,300 million transistors on a 122 mm² die, whereas the E5-2637 v3 packs 2,600 million transistors on a much larger 356 mm² die. The smaller process node gives the E3-1505M v5 a significant power efficiency advantage, reflected in its 45 W TDP versus the E5-2637 v3's 135 W.

Cache hierarchy differs as well. Both have 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core, but the E5-2637 v3 has 15 MB of shared L3, nearly double the E3-1505M v5's 8 MB. Memory support also diverges: the E3-1505M v5 accepts both DDR3 and DDR4 in a dual-channel configuration, while the E5-2637 v3 is DDR4-only but runs quad-channel, yielding a theoretical bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s versus 34.1 GB/s. PCIe connectivity is another major split: the E5-2637 v3 offers 40 Gen 3 lanes, while the E3-1505M v5 has 16. The E3-1505M v5 includes integrated HD Graphics P530; the E5-2637 v3 has none.

The sockets are incompatible: the E3-1505M v5 uses Intel BGA 1440, a mobile-style socket, while the E5-2637 v3 uses Intel Socket 2011-3, a server platform. Both are end-of-life products, and both have locked multipliers. The E3-1505M v5 was released on 2015-10-26, the E5-2637 v3 on 2014-09-07.

Specification Differences

The two processors share core count (4), thread count (8), boost clock (3.70 GHz), L1 and L2 cache sizes, ECC memory support, and a locked multiplier. They differ in nearly every other specification.

• Base clock: 2.80 GHz (E3-1505M v5) vs 3.50 GHz (E5-2637 v3)
• TDP: 45 W vs 135 W
• Socket: Intel BGA 1440 vs Intel Socket 2011-3
• Architecture: Skylake vs Haswell
• Process node: 14 nm vs 22 nm
• Transistors: 2,300 million vs 2,600 million
• Die size: 122 mm² vs 356 mm²
• L3 cache: 8 MB shared vs 15 MB shared
• Memory support: DDR3, DDR4 vs DDR4 only
• Memory bus: Dual-channel vs Quad-channel
• Memory bandwidth: 34.1 GB/s vs 68.3 GB/s
• PCIe lanes: 16 vs 40 (Gen 3, CPU only)
• Integrated graphics: HD Graphics P530 vs none
• Release date: 2015-10-26 vs 2014-09-07
• Launch MSRP: $434 vs $996
• Part number: SR2FM vs SR202
• Percentile: 42nd vs 41st
• Average benchmark score: 1817 vs 1773

The E5-2637 v3 has a higher base clock, larger L3, quad-channel memory, and more PCIe lanes, but the E3-1505M v3 counters with a smaller process node, lower TDP, integrated graphics, and a lower launch MSRP.

Where Each One Wins

In the recorded Cinebench benchmarks, the Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 wins all six tests. It leads by 2.6% in R15 multi-core, 2.3% in R15 single-core, and 2.5% in the four R20 and R23 tests. This makes it the faster processor for CPU-bound workloads as measured by Cinebench, which includes both single-threaded and multi-threaded rendering tasks. Its higher average score (1817 vs 1773) and better percentile (42nd vs 41st) reinforce this.

The E5-2637 v3 does not win any head-to-head benchmark, but it offers platform-level advantages that the Cinebench scores do not capture. Its quad-channel memory interface provides 68.3 GB/s of bandwidth, double the E3-1505M v5's 34.1 GB/s, which can benefit memory-intensive server applications. Its 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes allow for more expansion cards, storage controllers, or accelerators. The larger 15 MB L3 cache may also help in workloads with high cache reuse, though the benchmark data does not isolate that effect.

The E3-1505M v5 wins on power efficiency, with a 45 W TDP versus 135 W, and it includes integrated graphics, which the E5-2637 v3 lacks. For systems that need a compact, low-power platform with built-in display output, the E3-1505M v5 is the clear choice. For systems that require extensive PCIe expansion or maximum memory bandwidth, the E5-2637 v3 provides those capabilities, even though it loses in raw Cinebench performance.

The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 as the better performer in every measured Cinebench test. It wins all six head-to-head comparisons, has a higher average benchmark score, and does so with a much lower TDP and a smaller process node. Its integrated graphics and lower launch MSRP ($434) add further appeal for workstation builds that do not need a discrete GPU.

The Intel Xeon E5-2637 v3, despite its higher base clock and larger L3 cache, trails in all recorded benchmarks. Its strengths lie in platform features: quad-channel memory with 68.3 GB/s bandwidth, 40 PCIe lanes, and a larger 15 MB L3. These are meaningful for server workloads that depend on memory throughput or expansion capacity, but they do not translate into Cinebench wins. Its launch MSRP was $996, more than double the E3-1505M v5.

For users prioritizing CPU compute performance as measured by Cinebench, the E3-1505M v5 is the recommended choice. For users who need quad-channel memory or extensive PCIe connectivity, the E5-2637 v3 offers those capabilities, but the benchmark data shows it is slower in the tested workloads. The E3-1505M v5 is the stronger all-around processor in this comparison.