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 5110

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon 5110

Report a correction
Significantly lower typical power consumption 52.81W vs 77.19W More than 30% lower typical power consumption
Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 2 vs 1 Twice as many CPUs in SMP configuration
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 Core2 Quad Q9550

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core2 Quad Q9550

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 12 MB vs 4 MB 3x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much higher clock speed 2.83 GHz vs 1.6 GHz More than 75% higher clock speed
Much newer manufacturing process 45 nm vs 65 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much more l2 cache per core 3 MB/core vs 2 MB/core 50% more l2 cache per core
Significantly better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score 5,498 vs 3,028 More than 80% better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.99 GHz vs 2.51 GHz Around 60% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Supports trusted computing Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing
Better geekbench 3 single core score 1,604 vs 856 More than 85% better geekbench 3 single core score
More cores 4 vs 2 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.03 GHz vs 1.6 GHz More than 2.5x better overclocked clock speed (Water)
More threads 4 vs 2 Twice as many threads
Better performance per dollar 0.5 pt/$ vs 0.38 pt/$ More than 30% better performance per dollar
Higher Maximum operating temperature 71.4 °C vs 65 °C Around 10% higher Maximum operating temperature
Newer Jan, 2008 vs Jun, 2006 Release date over 1 years later

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon 5110 vs Core2 Quad Q9550

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon 5110
68,550 MB/s
Core2 Quad Q9550
121,500 MB/s

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon 5110  vs
Core2 Quad Q9550 
Clock speed 1.6 GHz 2.83 GHz
Cores Dual core Quad core
Socket type
LGA 771
LGA 775

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing No Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE4
SSE3
EM64T
SSE
SSE4.1
Supplemental 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 1.17 pt/W 1.51 pt/W
Typical power consumption 52.81W 77.19W

bus

Architecture FSB FSB
Number of links 1 1
Clock speed 1,066 MHz 1,333 MHz

details

Xeon 5110  vs
Core2 Quad Q9550 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 2 4
L2 cache 4 MB 12 MB
L2 cache per core 2 MB/core 3 MB/core
Manufacture process 65 nm 45 nm
Transistor count 291,000,000 820,000,000
Max CPUs 2 1
Clock multiplier 6 8
Voltage range 1 - 1.5V 0.85 - 1.36V
Operating temperature Unknown - 65°C Unknown - 71.4°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.51 GHz 3.99 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.6 GHz 4.03 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.51 GHz 3.99 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 5110
Report a correction
Intel Core2 Quad Q9550
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus