0 Comments
| Intel Xeon E5420 vs Core2 Duo E8400 |
Released November, 2007
Intel Xeon E5420
- 2.5 GHz
- Quad core
Reasons to buy the Intel Xeon E5420
![]() | Much more l2 cache 12 MB | ![]() | Significantly better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score 5,821 |
![]() | Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 2 | ![]() | More cores 4 |
VS
Released January, 2008
Intel Core2 Duo E8400
- 3 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Core2 Duo E8400
![]() | Higher clock speed 3 GHz | ![]() | Supports trusted computing Yes |
![]() | Lower typical power consumption 52.81W | ![]() | Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.22 GHz |
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of E5420 vs E8400 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?
VS
| ![]() | Intel Core2 Duo E8400CPUBoss Winner |
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
Much more l2 cache | 12 MB | vs | 6 MB | 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Significantly better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score | 5,821 | vs | 2,982 | More than 95% better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score | |||
Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration | 2 | vs | 1 | Twice as many CPUs in SMP configuration | |||
More cores | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many cores; run more applications at once | |||
More threads | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many threads | |||
| |||||||
Higher clock speed | 3 GHz | vs | 2.5 GHz | 20% higher clock speed | |||
Supports trusted computing | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing | |||
Lower typical power consumption | 52.81W | vs | 65W | Around 20% lower typical power consumption | |||
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.22 GHz | vs | 3.19 GHz | More than 30% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
Better performance per dollar | 0.67 pt/$ | vs | 0.41 pt/$ | More than 60% better performance per dollar | |||
Better PassMark (Single core) score | 1,251 | vs | 1,073 | More than 15% better PassMark (Single core) score | |||
Higher Maximum operating temperature | 72.4 °C | vs | 67 °C | Around 10% higher Maximum operating temperature | |||
Lower annual home energy cost | 15.66 $/year | vs | 19.27 $/year | Around 20% lower annual home energy cost | |||
Lower annual commercial energy cost | 56.94 $/year | vs | 70.08 $/year | Around 20% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.23 GHz | vs | 3.94 GHz | More than 5% better overclocked clock speed (Water) |
Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E5420 vs Core2 Duo E8400
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Xeon E5420
5,821
Core2 Duo E8400
2,982
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Xeon E5420
1,317
Core2 Duo E8400
1,625
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Xeon E5420
106,200 MB/s
Core2 Duo E8400
128,000 MB/s
GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Xeon E5420
4,529
Core2 Duo E8400
2,826
GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Xeon E5420
6,104
Core2 Duo E8400
3,092
GeekBench
Xeon E5420
6,104
Core2 Duo E8400
4,794
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
Xeon E5420
3,534
Core2 Duo E8400
2,160
PassMark (Single Core)
Xeon E5420
1,073
Core2 Duo E8400
1,251
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Xeon E5420 | vs | Core2 Duo E8400 |
---|---|---|---|
Clock speed | 2.5 GHz | 3 GHz | |
Cores | Quad core | Dual 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 | |||
SSE3 | |||
SSE | |||
SSE4.1 | |||
Supplemental SSE3 | |||
Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
power consumption | |||
TDP | 80W | 65W | |
Annual home energy cost | 19.27 $/year | 15.66 $/year | |
Annual commercial energy cost | 70.08 $/year | 56.94 $/year | |
Performance per watt | 1.78 pt/W | 1.83 pt/W | |
Typical power consumption | 65W | 52.81W | |
bus | |||
Architecture | FSB | FSB | |
Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
Clock speed | 1,333 MHz | 1,333 MHz |
details | Xeon E5420 | vs | Core2 Duo E8400 |
---|---|---|---|
Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
Threads | 4 | 2 | |
L2 cache | 12 MB | 6 MB | |
L2 cache per core | 3 MB/core | 3 MB/core | |
Manufacture process | 45 nm | 45 nm | |
Transistor count | 820,000,000 | 410,000,000 | |
Max CPUs | 2 | 1 | |
Clock multiplier | 7 | 9 | |
Voltage range | 0.85 - 1.35V | 0.85 - 1.36V | |
Operating temperature | Unknown - 67°C | Unknown - 72.4°C | |
overclocking | |||
Overclocked clock speed | 3.19 GHz | 4.22 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 3.94 GHz | 4.23 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.19 GHz | 4.22 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 E5420 ![]() | Intel Core2 Duo E8400 ![]() |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | ||
Q6600 vs E8400 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$125 | $179 | |
3220 vs E8400 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | $179 | |
Q8400 vs E8400 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$125 | $179 | |
E7500 vs E8400 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$64 | $179 | |
E5700 vs E8400 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | ||
250 vs E8400 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$339 | $179 | |
Q9650 vs E8400 | ||
Popular Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$300 | $305 | |
2500 vs W3520 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$350 | $272 | |
6700K vs 4790K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
6410 vs 4200U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
7th Gen A9-9410 vs 6200U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$161 | $275 | |
N3540 vs 4005U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$225 | $134 | |
3217U vs 847 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$180 | ||
5200 vs 3470 | ||