Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 vs Intel Xeon E5-1630 v4 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 and Intel Xeon E5-1630 v4 are both 4-core, 8-thread server/workstation processors from Intel, but they represent two fundamentally different design philosophies. The E3-1558L v5 is a low-power, mobile-derived Skylake part with integrated graphics, while the E5-1630 v4 is a high-clock Broadwell-EP desktop/server chip with a massive memory interface. The benchmark data shows the E3-1558L v5 winning all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, but the margins are extremely narrow, ranging from 0.5% to 1.1%. This page breaks down where each chip wins, why the architecture differs, and who should choose which based strictly on the data.

Where Each One Wins

The head-to-head benchmark results are unambiguous: the Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 wins all six Cinebench tests, with a 6-0 sweep. The largest margin is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the E3-1558L v5 scores 92 against the E5-1630 v4's 91, a 1.1% delta. In multi-core tests, the E3-1558L v5 leads by 0.6% in R15 (655 vs 651), 0.7% in R20 (2733 vs 2714), and 0.7% in R23 (6508 vs 6464). Single-core R20 and R23 show 0.5% and 0.7% leads, respectively, with scores of 385 vs 383 and 918 vs 912.

The E5-1630 v4 does not win a single benchmark in this comparison. However, its average benchmark score of 1869 places it at the 42nd percentile among all CPUs, while the E3-1558L v5 sits at the 43rd percentile with an average of 1882. The E5-1630 v4's nearest rival is the Intel Core i3-9350K (avg 1867, 0.1% behind), followed by the Core i5-1035G4 (1861, 0.4% ahead). The E3-1558L v5's nearest rival is the Intel Processor U300 (1881, 0.1% ahead), with the Xeon E3-1270L v4 and Xeon D-1531 both at 1883 and 1885, respectively. These numbers indicate both CPUs are mid-pack performers, with the E3-1558L v5 holding a marginal edge in every measured scenario.

The E3-1558L v5's consistent, if narrow, wins across both single- and multi-threaded tests suggest it has a slight architectural efficiency advantage in Cinebench. The E5-1630 v4 compensates with raw clock speed — a 3.70 GHz base and 4.00 GHz boost — but the data shows this does not translate into higher scores. In workloads that favor high memory bandwidth, the E5-1630 v4's quad-channel support would likely be a factor, but that metric is not captured in the provided Cinebench results.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on the same 14 nm process node from Intel, but the similarities end there. The E3-1558L v5 uses the Skylake architecture (codename Skylake-H), while the E5-1630 v4 uses Broadwell (codename Broadwell-EP). The E3-1558L v5 has 2,300 million transistors on a 171 mm² die, whereas the E5-1630 v4 packs 3,400 million transistors on a 246 mm² die. The larger die and higher transistor count on the E5-1630 v4 do not yield higher benchmark scores, but they enable other features.

Cache configurations differ: the E3-1558L v5 has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the E5-1630 v4 has 10 MB. Both have 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core. The E3-1558L v5 supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory over a dual-channel bus, offering 34.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The E5-1630 v4 supports only DDR4 but over a quad-channel bus, delivering 76.8 GB/s — more than double the bandwidth. This is a critical distinction for memory-intensive workloads, even though it does not appear in the Cinebench results.

The E3-1558L v5 includes integrated Iris Pro Graphics P555, while the E5-1630 v4 has no integrated graphics. The E3-1558L v5 has 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes (CPU only), whereas the E5-1630 v4 provides 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes. Socket compatibility is entirely different: the E3-1558L v5 uses Intel BGA 1440, a soldered mobile socket, while the E5-1630 v4 uses Intel Socket 2011-3, a traditional LGA socket. The E3-1558L v5 has a 45 W TDP, a remarkably low figure for a 4-core chip, while the E5-1630 v4 draws 140 W. Both support ECC memory and are end-of-life products, with the E3-1558L v5 released on May 30, 2016, and the E5-1630 v4 on June 19, 2016.

The Verdict

The benchmark data clearly favors the Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5, as it wins every head-to-head test. The E3-1558L v5 is the better choice for users who prioritize raw Cinebench performance, integrated graphics, and low power consumption. Its 45 W TDP is less than one-third of the E5-1630 v4's 140 W, making it suitable for compact, thermally constrained systems. The inclusion of Iris Pro Graphics P555 eliminates the need for a discrete GPU in basic display scenarios, and the BGA 1440 socket indicates a board-level design where the CPU is soldered.

The E5-1630 v4, despite losing all benchmarks, is not without merit. Its quad-channel memory bus with 76.8 GB/s of bandwidth is a significant advantage for memory-heavy server workloads, scientific computing, or virtualization environments where data throughput is critical. The 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes allow for extensive expansion options, including multiple GPUs or NVMe drives. The 10 MB L3 cache, while not translating to Cinebench wins, could benefit certain workloads with larger working sets. The E5-1630 v4 is the pick for users who need a traditional socketed CPU with high memory bandwidth and expansion capacity, accepting slightly lower Cinebench scores.

For most users comparing these two on benchmark results alone, the E3-1558L v5 is the winner. The deltas are small — 0.6% to 1.1% — but they are consistent across all six tests. The E3-1558L v5 also holds a better average benchmark score (1882 vs 1869) and a higher percentile ranking (43rd vs 42nd). However, the E5-1630 v4's platform advantages in memory and PCIe are not reflected in Cinebench, so the choice depends on the broader system requirements.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-core score?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 wins all three single-core tests: 92 vs 91 in Cinebench R15, 385 vs 383 in R20, and 918 vs 912 in R23.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The E3-1558L v5 has a 45 W TDP, while the E5-1630 v4 has a 140 W TDP.

Q: Does either processor include integrated graphics?

A: Only the E3-1558L v5 includes integrated graphics, with Iris Pro Graphics P555. The E5-1630 v4 has no integrated graphics.

Q: Which chip supports more memory bandwidth?

A: The E5-1630 v4 supports quad-channel DDR4 with 76.8 GB/s, while the E3-1558L v5 supports dual-channel DDR3/DDR4 with 34.1 GB/s.

Q: What are the socket types for each processor?

A: The E3-1558L v5 uses Intel BGA 1440, and the E5-1630 v4 uses Intel Socket 2011-3.

Q: How many PCIe lanes does each provide?

A: The E3-1558L v5 provides 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, while the E5-1630 v4 provides 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single win for the E3-1558L v5 comes in Cinebench R15 single-core, where it scores 92 against the E5-1630 v4's 91, a 1.1% delta. This is the only test where the margin exceeds 1%. In multi-core R15, the E3-1558L v5 scores 655 vs 651, a 0.6% lead. The R20 multi-core test shows 2733 vs 2714, a 0.7% delta, and the R23 multi-core test shows 6508 vs 6464, also 0.7%. Single-core R20 has a 0.5% delta (385 vs 383), while single-core R23 has a 0.7% delta (918 vs 912).

The E5-1630 v4's closest result is in R20 single-core, where it trails by only 2 points (383 vs 385). Across all tests, the E3-1558L v5's average benchmark score is 1882, while the E5-1630 v4's is 1869, a 13-point gap. The E3-1558L v5's percentile rank is 43, one point higher than the E5-1630 v4's 42. The nearest rival for the E3-1558L v5 is the Intel Processor U300 with an average score of 1881, a 0.1% delta, while the E5-1630 v4's nearest rival is the Intel Core i3-9350K at 1867, a 0.1% delta. These benchmark results show that while the E3-1558L v5 wins every head-to-head, both processors are extremely close in performance, with deltas that could be considered within run-to-run variance.

Specification Differences

The core count and thread count are identical: 4 cores and 8 threads for both. The base clock differs significantly: the E3-1558L v5 runs at 1900.00 MHz, while the E5-1630 v4 runs at 3700.00 MHz. Boost clocks are 3.30 GHz and 4.00 GHz, respectively. Despite the E5-1630 v4's higher clocks, the E3-1558L v5 wins all benchmarks, indicating the Skylake architecture is more efficient per clock in Cinebench.

The process node is the same (14 nm), but the die size and transistor count differ: the E3-1558L v5 has 171 mm² with 2,300 million transistors, while the E5-1630 v4 has 246 mm² with 3,400 million transistors. L3 cache is 8 MB for the E3-1558L v5 and 10 MB for the E5-1630 v4, while L1 and L2 are identical at 64 KB and 256 KB per core. Memory support differs: the E3-1558L v5 supports DDR3 and DDR4 dual-channel with 34.1 GB/s, while the E5-1630 v4 supports only DDR4 quad-channel with 76.8 GB/s. PCIe lanes are 16 vs 40, both Gen 3. The E3-1558L v5 has integrated Iris Pro Graphics P555; the E5-1630 v4 has none. TDP is 45 W vs 140 W. Sockets are BGA 1440 vs Socket 2011-3. Both support ECC memory, are end-of-life, and lack an unlocked multiplier. The E3-1558L v5 was released on May 30, 2016, with a launch MSRP of $396, while the E5-1630 v4 was released on June 19, 2016, with a launch MSRP of $406.