Intel Xeon E3-1545M v5 vs Intel Xeon E5-1630 v4 Comparison

The Verdict

The Intel Xeon E3-1545M v5 and Intel Xeon E5-1630 v4 are nearly identical in raw compute performance, but they serve completely different physical and platform realities. The E3-1545M v5 wins all six head-to-head benchmark comparisons, yet by margins so small (0.5% to 1.1%) that they are effectively noise for real workloads. The data shows a 4-core/8-thread Skylake-H part with integrated graphics and a 45W TDP against a 4-core/8-thread Broadwell-EP part with no graphics and a 140W TDP. The E3-1545M v5 is the pick for compact, power-conscious workstation builds where the Iris Pro Graphics P580 eliminates the need for a discrete GPU. The E5-1630 v4 is the pick for existing Socket 2011-3 platforms that need quad-channel memory bandwidth (76.8 GB/s) and 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes for expansion-heavy server or workstation tasks. Neither chip is a performance leader — the E3-1545M v5 sits at the 43rd percentile of all CPUs, the E5-1630 v4 at the 42nd — so buyers should choose based on platform fit, not benchmark deltas. The E3-1545M v5 is the better all-rounder on paper; the E5-1630 v4 is the better fit for memory-bandwidth-starved workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-154M v5 wins all three multi-core Cinebench tests. In Cinebench R15 multi-core it scores 654 vs 651 (0.5% ahead), in R20 multi-core 2728 vs 2714 (0.5% ahead), and in R23 multi-core 6497 vs 6464 (0.5% ahead). The difference is consistent but tiny.

Q: Does the E5-1630 v4 have integrated graphics?

A: No. The E5-1630 v4 lists no integrated graphics, while the E3-1545M v5 includes Iris Pro Graphics P580. This makes the E3-1545M v5 a self-contained option for systems without a discrete GPU.

Q: Which CPU has higher clock speeds?

A: The E5-1630 v4 has a 3.70 GHz base clock and 4.00 GHz boost clock. The E3-1545M v5 has a 2.90 GHz base clock and 3.80 GHz boost clock. Despite lower clocks, the E3-1545M v5 still edges out the E5-1630 v4 in all single-core benchmarks.

Q: What memory bandwidth does each support?

A: The E3-1545M v5 supports dual-channel DDR3 and DDR4 memory with 34.1 GB/s bandwidth. The E5-1630 v4 supports quad-channel DDR4 with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth — more than double the bandwidth of the E3-1545M v5.

Q: Are these CPUs still in production?

A: Both are end-of-life. The E3-1545M v5 was released on 2016-01-23, and the E5-1630 v4 on 2016-06-19.

Q: How do these CPUs compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The E3-1545M v5 has an average benchmark score of 1879, sitting 0.1% below the Intel Processor U300 (1881) and 0.2% below the Xeon E3-1558L v5 (1882). The E5-1630 v4 averages 1869, placing it 0.1% above the Intel Core i3-9350K (1867) and 0.4% above the Intel Core i5-1035G4 (1861).

Architecture Differences

The E3-1545M v5 is built on the Skylake-H architecture using a 14 nm process at Intel's foundry. It packs 2,300 million transistors into a 171 mm² die. The E5-1630 v4 uses the Broadwell-EP architecture, also on a 14 nm process, but crams 3,400 million transistors into a larger 246 mm² die. Both have 4 cores and 8 threads, with identical L1 cache (64 KB per core) and L2 cache (256 KB per core). The L3 cache differs: the E3-1545M v5 has 8 MB shared, while the E5-1630 v4 has 10 MB shared.

The memory controllers are a major architectural split. The E3-1545M v5 supports both DDR3 and DDR4 in dual-channel mode, yielding 34.1 GB/s. The E5-1630 v4 supports only DDR4 but in quad-channel mode, yielding 76.8 GB/s. The E3-1545M v5 integrates Iris Pro Graphics P580; the E5-1630 v4 has none. PCIe connectivity also differs: the E3-1545M v5 provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the E5-1630 v4 provides Gen 3 with 40 lanes.

Both are locked multipliers, support ECC memory, and target the server/workstation market segment. The E3-1545M v5 uses Intel BGA 1440, a soldered mobile socket, while the E5-1630 v4 uses Intel Socket 2011-3, a desktop/server socket with a removable processor. The E3-1545M v5's part number is SR2QU; the E5-1630 v4's is SR2PF.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon E3-1545M v5 | Intel Xeon E5-1630 v4 |

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

| Base Clock | 2.90 GHz | 3.70 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.80 GHz | 4.00 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 140 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1440 | Intel Socket 2011-3 |

| Architecture | Skylake | Broadwell |

| Codename | Skylake-H | Broadwell-EP |

| Transistors | 2,300 million | 3,400 million |

| Die Size | 171 mm² | 246 mm² |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | 10 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR3, DDR4 | DDR4 |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 34.1 GB/s | 76.8 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 3, 40 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Iris Pro Graphics P580 | None |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Desktop |

| Launch MSRP | $679 | $406 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The E3-1545M v5 sweeps all six Cinebench comparisons, but the victories are razor-thin. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the E3-1545M v5 scores 654 against 651 for the E5-1630 v4, a 0.5% delta. Single-core R15 shows 92 vs 91, a 1.1% edge — the largest margin of any test. Cinebench R20 multi-core repeats the pattern: 2728 vs 2714, again 0.5%. Single-core R20: 385 vs 383, 0.5%. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 6497 vs 6464, 0.5%. Single-core R23: 917 vs 912, 0.5%.

These numbers tell a clear story: despite the E5-1630 v4's higher base clock (3.70 GHz vs 2.90 GHz) and boost clock (4.00 GHz vs 3.80 GHz), the E3-1545M v5's Skylake architecture extracts slightly more performance per clock in every test. The 1.1% single-core R15 win is the only test that breaks the 0.5% pattern, suggesting the E3-1545M v5 has a marginal IPC advantage under short, lightly threaded loads. The multi-core results are essentially identical — a 654 vs 651 spread in R15 and a 6497 vs 6464 spread in R23 both fall well within run-to-run variance.

The average benchmark scores reflect this parity. The E3-1545M v5 averages 1879 across all benchmarks; the E5-1630 v4 averages 1869. That 10-point gap (0.5%) matches the head-to-head deltas. In the nearest-rivals table, the E3-1545M v5's closest competitor is the Intel Processor U300 at 1881 (-0.1%), while the E5-1630 v4's closest is the Intel Core i3-9350K at 1867 (+0.1%). Notably, each chip appears in the other's nearest-rivals list — the E3-1545M v5 is listed as a rival to the E5-1630 v4 with a -0.5% delta. This confirms they occupy the same performance tier, differing by less than 1% in aggregate.

Where Each One Wins

The E3-1545M v5 wins every direct benchmark comparison, but its real advantages extend beyond scores. Its 45W TDP makes it suitable for compact, thermally constrained systems where a 140W chip would be impractical. The integrated Iris Pro Graphics P580 means a complete system can run without a discrete GPU, saving space and power. The BGA 1440 socket, while non-upgradeable, is typical for mobile and small-form-factor workstation boards. For workloads that are CPU-bound but not memory-bandwidth-bound — typical Cinebench-style rendering, compilation, or general productivity — the E3-1545M v5 is the better choice because it achieves the same performance at a fraction of the power envelope.

The E5-1630 v4 wins on platform capabilities that benchmarks do not capture. Its quad-channel memory bus delivers 76.8 GB/s, more than double the E3-1545M v5's 34.1 GB/s. Workloads that stream large datasets — in-memory databases, scientific computing, or high-end media processing — will see real benefits from that bandwidth. The 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes support multiple GPUs, NVMe drives, or high-speed networking cards without a chipset bottleneck. The Socket 2011-3 platform also offers upgradeability, whereas BGA 1440 is soldered. The E5-1630 v4's lower launch MSRP of $406 (vs $679) reflects its desktop market positioning, though both are end-of-life.

For a new build, the E3-1545M v5 is the pragmatic choice: it matches the E5-1630 v4 in compute, wins all benchmarks, and eliminates the need for a separate GPU. For an existing Socket 2011-3 system, the E5-1630 v4 is the natural drop-in replacement if the platform's memory bandwidth and PCIe lanes are already part of the workflow. The data does not support choosing the E5-1630 v4 for raw CPU speed — the E3-1545M v5 is faster in every test — but the E5-1630 v4's platform-level features are the deciding factor for bandwidth-hungry or expansion-heavy systems.