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
Front view of Intel Core i5 2400

Intel Core i5 2400

CPUBoss Winner

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Xeon E5410

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon E5410

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 12 MB vs 1 MB 12x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much more l2 cache per core 3 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 12x more l2 cache per core
Significantly lower typical power consumption 65W vs 93.6W 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 19.27 $/year vs 27.75 $/year More than 30% lower annual home energy cost
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost 70.08 $/year vs 100.92 $/year More than 30% lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of Intel Core i5 2400

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i5 2400

Report a correction
Much better performance per dollar 4.58 pt/$ vs 0.51 pt/$ Around 9x better performance per dollar
Significantly higher clock speed 3.1 GHz vs 2.33 GHz Around 35% higher clock speed
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Much newer manufacturing process 32 nm vs 45 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much better performance per watt 8.14 pt/W vs 1.81 pt/W Around 4.5x better performance per watt
Significantly better PassMark (Single core) score 1,742 vs 1,001 Around 75% better PassMark (Single core) score
Supports trusted computing Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing
Better PassMark score 5,901 vs 3,284 Around 80% better PassMark score
Newer Jan, 2011 vs Nov, 2007 Release date over 3 years later
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.54 GHz vs 2.96 GHz Around 20% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Higher Maximum operating temperature 72.6 °C vs 67 °C Around 10% higher Maximum operating temperature

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E5410 vs Core i5 2400

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E5410
7,496
Core i5 2400
8,298

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E5410
1,228
Core i5 2400
2,638

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E5410
98,800 MB/s
Core i5 2400
2,260,000 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E5410
4,183
Core i5 2400
8,258

GeekBench

Xeon E5410
4,183
Core i5 2400
10,769

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Xeon E5410
3,284
Core i5 2400
5,901

PassMark (Single Core)

Xeon E5410
1,001
Core i5 2400
1,742

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon E5410  vs
Core i5 2400 
Clock speed 2.33 GHz 3.1 GHz
Cores Quad core Quad core
Socket type
LGA 771
LGA 1155

features

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

power consumption

TDP 80W 95W
Annual home energy cost 19.27 $/year 27.75 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 70.08 $/year 100.92 $/year
Performance per watt 1.81 pt/W 8.14 pt/W
Typical power consumption 65W 93.6W

details

Xeon E5410  vs
Core i5 2400 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 4
L2 cache 12 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 3 MB/core 0.25 MB/core
Manufacture process 45 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 2 1
Clock multiplier 7 31
Operating temperature Unknown - 67°C Unknown - 72.6°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.96 GHz 3.54 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.48 GHz 3.51 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.96 GHz 3.54 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU None GPU
Label N/A Intel® HD Graphics 2000
Number of displays supported N/A 2
GPU clock speed N/A 850 MHz
Turbo clock speed N/A 1,100 MHz

bus

Architecture FSB DMI
Number of links 1 1
Intel Xeon E5410
Report a correction
Intel Core i5 2400
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus