CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 3065 vs 915 among all CPUs

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more

Integrated Graphics

Integrated GPU performance for graphics

Sky Diver and Cloud Gate

Integrated Graphics (OpenCL)

Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing

CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more

Performance per Watt

How efficiently does the processor use electricity?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

No winner declared

Too close to call

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 3065

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon 3065

Report a correction
Has virtualization support Yes vs No Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines
Significantly lower typical power consumption 52.81W vs 77.19W More than 30% lower typical power consumption
Supports trusted computing Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing
Higher Maximum operating temperature 72 °C vs 63.4 °C Around 15% higher Maximum operating temperature
Better PassMark (Single core) score 864 vs 649 Around 35% better PassMark (Single core) score
Slightly better PassMark score 1,504 vs 584 More than 2.5x better PassMark score
Newer Oct, 2007 vs Jul, 2006 Release date over 1 years later
Significantly lower annual home energy cost 15.66 $/year vs 22.89 $/year More than 30% lower annual home energy cost
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost 56.94 $/year vs 83.22 $/year More than 30% lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of Intel Pentium D 915

Reasons to consider the
Intel Pentium D 915

Report a correction
Higher clock speed 2.8 GHz vs 2.33 GHz More than 20% higher clock speed
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.92 GHz vs 3.17 GHz Around 25% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.43 GHz vs 2.33 GHz Around 90% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon 3065 vs Pentium D 915

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon 3065  vs
Pentium D 915 
Clock speed 2.33 GHz 2.8 GHz
Cores Dual core Dual core
Socket type
LGA 775

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing Yes No
Has virtualization support Yes No
Instruction set extensions
MMX
SSE
SSE2
SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 65W 95W
Annual home energy cost 15.66 $/year 22.89 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 56.94 $/year 83.22 $/year
Performance per watt 0.97 pt/W 0.51 pt/W
Typical power consumption 52.81W 77.19W

bus

Architecture FSB FSB
Number of links 1 1
Clock speed 1,333 MHz 800 MHz

details

Xeon 3065  vs
Pentium D 915 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 2 2
L2 cache 4 MB 4 MB
L2 cache per core 2 MB/core 2 MB/core
Manufacture process 65 nm 65 nm
Transistor count 291,000,000 376,000,000
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 7 14
Voltage range 0.85 - 1.5V 1.2 - 1.34V
Operating temperature Unknown - 72°C Unknown - 63.4°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 3.17 GHz 3.92 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.33 GHz 4.43 GHz
PassMark (Overclocked) 1,646.4 1,503.1
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.17 GHz 3.92 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU None None
Label N/A N/A
Latest DirectX N/A N/A
Number of displays supported N/A N/A
GPU clock speed N/A N/A
Turbo clock speed N/A N/A
3DMark06 N/A N/A
Intel Xeon 3065
Report a correction
Intel Pentium D 915
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus