Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Xeon 3050

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon 3050

Report a correction
Significantly more l2 cache 2 MB vs 1 MB 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much lower typical power consumption 52.81W vs 112.55W 2.1x lower typical power consumption
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 4x more l2 cache per core
Much lower annual home energy cost 15.66 $/year vs 41.29 $/year 2.6x lower annual home energy cost
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 56.94 $/year vs 110.03 $/year Around 50% lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of Intel Core i5 2500K

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i5 2500K

Report a correction
Much newer manufacturing process 32 nm vs 65 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Significantly higher clock speed 3.3 GHz vs 2.13 GHz Around 55% higher clock speed
Much better performance per dollar 4.1 pt/$ vs 0.48 pt/$ More than 8.5x better performance per dollar
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Much better PassMark (Single core) score 1,863 vs 820 More than 2.2x better PassMark (Single core) score
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.98 GHz vs 3.39 GHz More than 45% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Much better performance per watt 6.79 pt/W vs 1.38 pt/W Around 5x better performance per watt
Significantly better PassMark score 6,383 vs 1,311 More than 4.8x better PassMark score
More cores 4 vs 2 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Higher Maximum operating temperature 72.6 °C vs 61.4 °C Around 20% higher Maximum operating temperature
More threads 4 vs 2 Twice as many threads
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.88 GHz vs 3.55 GHz Around 40% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon 3050 vs Core i5 2500K

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon 3050
2,109

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon 3050
1,195

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon 3050
91,600 MB/s
Core i5 2500K
2,530,000 MB/s

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Xeon 3050
1,311

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon 3050  vs
Core i5 2500K 
Clock speed 2.13 GHz 3.3 GHz
Cores Dual core Quad core
Socket type
LGA 775
LGA 1155

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing No No
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE4
AVX
SSE3
EM64T
SSE
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
Supplemental SSE3
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 65W 95W
Annual home energy cost 15.66 $/year 41.29 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 56.94 $/year 110.03 $/year
Performance per watt 1.38 pt/W 6.79 pt/W
Typical power consumption 52.81W 112.55W

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Supports ECC No No

details

Xeon 3050  vs
Core i5 2500K 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 2 4
L2 cache 2 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 1 MB/core 0.25 MB/core
Manufacture process 65 nm 32 nm
Transistor count 167,000,000 1,160,000,000
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 8 33
Voltage range 0.85 - 1.5V 1.2 - 1.5V
Operating temperature Unknown - 61.4°C 5 - 72.6°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 3.39 GHz 4.98 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.55 GHz 4.88 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.39 GHz 4.98 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU None GPU
Label N/A Intel® HD Graphics 3000
Latest DirectX N/A 10.1
Number of displays supported N/A 2
GPU clock speed N/A 850 MHz
Turbo clock speed N/A 1,100 MHz
3DMark06 N/A 5,275

bus

Architecture FSB DMI
Number of links 1 1
Intel Xeon 3050
Report a correction
Intel Core i5 2500K
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus