Intel Xeon E3-1565L v5 vs Intel Xeon Platinum 8180 Comparison

The Verdict

The data presents an unambiguous performance hierarchy between these two Intel Xeon parts. The Intel Xeon Platinum 8180 wins all six recorded head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with a dominant lead in every single test. The E3-1565L v5 does not win a single recorded benchmark. The Platinum 8180 delivers roughly 80.9% higher scores across every Cinebench workload, whether single-core or multi-core, which indicates a massive performance gulf.

The E3-1565L v5 is a compact, low-power server processor with 4 cores and 8 threads, designed for embedded or workstation tasks where space and power constraints matter more than raw throughput. The Platinum 8180 is a 28-core, 56-thread flagship scalable processor aimed at heavy multi-threaded enterprise workloads. The database records the E3-1565L v5 at the 66th percentile among all CPUs, while the Platinum 8180 sits at the 65th percentile, meaning their aggregate standings are surprisingly close despite the lopsided benchmark results. The E3-1565L v5 has a higher average benchmark score of 10320 compared to 9406 for the Platinum 8180, which reflects the fact that the E3-1565L v5 has more recorded PassMark results, including encryption, compression, and physics tests, while the Platinum 8180 only has Cinebench scores in the database.

Who should pick which? The Platinum 8180 is the clear choice for any workload measured by Cinebench R15, R20, or R23. The E3-1565L v5, with its 35-watt TDP and integrated Iris Pro Graphics P580, makes sense for deployments where the processor must fit into a thermal envelope that the 205-watt Platinum 8180 cannot match. The data does not show any scenario where the E3-1565L v5 outperforms the Platinum 8180, so the verdict is straightforward: the Platinum 8180 wins on every measured metric, while the E3-1565L v5 wins on power efficiency and integrated graphics, which the database does not benchmark.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the Skylake architecture and are built on Intel's 14 nm process node, but they diverge sharply in scale and design intent. The E3-1565L v5 uses the Skylake-H codename, while the Platinum 8180 uses Skylake-SP. The E3-1565L v5 packs 2,300 million transistors on a 171 mm² die, whereas the Platinum 8180 integrates 8,000 million transistors, though its die size is not recorded in the database.

The cache hierarchies are fundamentally different. The E3-1565L v5 has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The Platinum 8180 has the same 64 KB L1 per core, but its L2 is 1 MB per core, and its shared L3 cache expands to 38.5 MB. This four-fold increase in L2 and nearly five-fold increase in L3 cache aligns with the 28-core configuration, providing each core with more local data storage.

Memory support also differs. The E3-1565L v5 supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory with a dual-channel bus and a recorded memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. The Platinum 8180 supports only DDR4, and its memory bus configuration and bandwidth are not recorded. Both processors support ECC memory, which is expected for server-class parts.

The E3-1565L v5 includes integrated Iris Pro Graphics P580, a feature entirely absent from the Platinum 8180, which has no integrated graphics. The E3-1565L v5 also has PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Platinum 8180's PCIe configuration is not recorded. The sockets differ accordingly: the E3-1565L v5 uses Intel BGA 1440, a soldered embedded form factor, while the Platinum 8180 uses Intel Socket 3647, a scalable server socket.

The E3-1565L v5 was released on 2016-05-30 and is marked as end-of-life, while the Platinum 8180 launched on 2017-07-10 with no production status recorded. The E3-1565L v5 carries a launch MSRP of $417, while the Platinum 8180 has no recorded launch MSRP.

Where Each One Wins

The Platinum 8180 wins in every recorded benchmark category. In multi-core Cinebench R15, it scores 3277 versus 627 for the E3-1565L v5, an 80.9% delta. In single-core R15, it scores 462 versus 88, an 81% delta. The pattern repeats across R20 and R23, with the Platinum 8180 maintaining approximately 80.9% leads in both multi-core and single-core tests.

The E3-1565L v5 does have recorded PassMark scores that the Platinum 8180 lacks. These include data compression at 94771, data encryption at 2314, extended instructions at 6031, find prime numbers at 43, floating point math at 14547, integer math at 23335, multithread at 7325, physics at 794, random string sorting at 11543, and single thread at 1970. These results are not directly comparable because the Platinum 8180 has no PassMark entries, but they do show that the E3-1565L v5 can handle everyday server tasks such as compression and encryption despite its modest core count.

The E3-1565L v5 wins on power consumption, with a 35-watt TDP versus 205 watts for the Platinum 8180. This makes the E3-1565L v5 suitable for dense, low-power environments where the Platinum 8180 would require substantial cooling infrastructure. The E3-1565L v5 also wins on integrated graphics, offering Iris Pro Graphics P580, which the Platinum 8180 does not provide at all.

For workloads that rely on Cinebench scores, which typically represent 3D rendering and general multi-threaded compute, the Platinum 8180 is the only reasonable choice. The E3-1565L v5 is better suited for scenarios where the CPU must coexist with limited thermal headroom or where a discrete GPU is not an option, though the database does not provide benchmark evidence for these scenarios.

FAQ

Q: How many cores does each processor have?

A: The Intel Xeon E3-1565L v5 has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Xeon Platinum 8180 has 28 cores and 56 threads.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The E3-1565L v5 has a TDP of 35 watts, while the Platinum 8180 has a TDP of 205 watts.

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

A: The Platinum 8180 scores 4591 in Cinebench R23 single-core, while the E3-1565L v5 scores 879, giving the Platinum 8180 an 80.9% lead.

Q: Does the E3-1565L v5 have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it includes Iris Pro Graphics P580, while the Platinum 8180 has no integrated graphics.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Both processors support ECC memory.

Q: What is the L3 cache size for each?

A: The E3-1565L v5 has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Platinum 8180 has 38.5 MB of shared L3 cache.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is one-sided. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Platinum 8180 scores 3277 against 627 for the E3-1565L v5, a delta of 80.9% in favor of the Platinum 8180. The single-core R15 test shows 462 versus 88, an 81% delta. These are not marginal differences; they represent a processor with roughly seven times the multi-core throughput and more than five times the single-core throughput.

Cinebench R20 follows the same pattern. Multi-core: 13658 for the Platinum 8180 versus 2614 for the E3-1565L v5, again an 80.9% delta. Single-core: 1928 versus 369, an 80.9% delta. The consistency of the 80.9% delta across all tests is notable, suggesting that the performance ratio is stable regardless of workload type, at least within the Cinebench suite.

Cinebench R23 multi-core sees the Platinum 8180 at 32520 versus 6226 for the E3-1565L v5, an 80.9% delta. Single-core R23 shows 4591 versus 879, also 80.9%. The Platinum 8180 wins all six recorded head-to-head benchmarks, with winsB equal to 6 and winsA equal to 0.

The percentile data places the E3-1565L v5 at the 66th percentile and the Platinum 8180 at the 65th percentile, which seems counterintuitive given the benchmark results. This discrepancy stems from the different benchmark sets recorded for each CPU. The E3-1565L v5 has 17 benchmark entries, including PassMark tests that boost its average score to 10320, while the Platinum 8180 has only 6 Cinebench entries, yielding an average of 9406. The nearest rivals for each part further illustrate this: the E3-1565L v5 sits within 0.9% of the Intel Xeon Platinum 8280, while the Platinum 8180 is within 1.3% of the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3960X.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every recorded specification. Core count: 4 for the E3-1565L v5 versus 28 for the Platinum 8180. Threads: 8 versus 56. Boost clock: 3.50 GHz versus 3.80 GHz, while base clocks are identical at 2.50 GHz. TDP: 35 watts versus 205 watts. Socket: BGA 1440 versus Socket 3647.

Cache sizes differ substantially. L2 cache is 256 KB per core for the E3-1565L v5 and 1 MB per core for the Platinum 8180. L3 cache is 8 MB shared versus 38.5 MB shared. Transistor count: 2,300 million versus 8,000 million. Die size: 171 mm² for the E3-1565L v5, with no recorded die size for the Platinum 8180.

Memory support: the E3-1565L v5 supports DDR3 and DDR4 with a dual-channel bus and 34.1 GB/s bandwidth. The Platinum 8180 supports only DDR4, with no recorded bus width or bandwidth. PCIe: the E3-1565L v5 has Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Platinum 8180 has no PCIe information recorded. Integrated graphics: Iris Pro Graphics P580 on the E3-1565L v5, none on the Platinum 8180.

Codename: Skylake-H versus Skylake-SP. Generation: "Xeon E3\n(Skylake-H)" versus "Xeon Platinum\n(Skylake-SP)". Release date: 2016-05-30 versus 2017-07-10. Production status: end-of-life for the E3-1565L v5, no recorded status for the Platinum 8180. Launch MSRP: $417 for the E3-1565L v5, none recorded for the Platinum 8180. Part numbers: SR2R8 for the E3-1565L v5 and SR377CD8067303314400 for the Platinum 8180. Both processors are multiplier-unlocked: false, and both are in the Server/Workstation market segment.