CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of E5420 vs Q6600 among all CPUs

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores
Xeon E5420
5.4
Core2 Quad Q6600
5.3
Core i3 3220
5.9
PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance
Xeon E5420
5.9
Core2 Quad Q6600
5.8
Core i3 3220
6.9
PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more

Integrated Graphics

Integrated GPU performance for graphics
Xeon E5420
0.0
Core2 Quad Q6600
0.0
Core i3 3220
5.0
Sky Diver and Cloud Gate

Integrated Graphics (OpenCL)

Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing
Xeon E5420
0.0
Core2 Quad Q6600
0.0
Core i3 3220
5.1
CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more

Performance per Watt

How efficiently does the processor use electricity?
Xeon E5420
5.0
Core2 Quad Q6600
5.0
Core i3 3220
5.2
Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?
Xeon E5420
n.d.
Core2 Quad Q6600
n.d.
Core i3 3220
6.4
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

Intel Xeon E5420

CPUBoss Winner
 Front view of Intel Xeon E5420
Front view of Intel Core2 Quad Q6600

Intel Core2 Quad Q6600

Join the discussion

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Xeon E5420

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon E5420

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 12 MB vs 8 MB 50% more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much newer manufacturing process 45 nm vs 65 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much better geekbench 3 AES single core score 106,200 MB/s vs 102,800 MB/s Around 5% better geekbench 3 AES single core score
Much more l2 cache per core 3 MB/core vs 2 MB/core 50% more l2 cache per core
Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 2 vs 1 Twice as many CPUs in SMP configuration
Significantly lower typical power consumption 65W vs 85.31W Around 25% lower typical power consumption
Better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score 5,821 vs 4,490 Around 30% better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score
Higher Maximum operating temperature 67 °C vs 62.2 °C Around 10% higher Maximum operating temperature
Newer Nov, 2007 vs Jan, 2007 Release date 10 months later
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost 70.08 $/year vs 91.98 $/year Around 25% lower annual commercial energy cost
Significantly lower annual home energy cost 19.27 $/year vs 25.29 $/year Around 25% lower annual home energy cost
Slightly better performance per watt 1.78 pt/W vs 1.19 pt/W Around 50% better performance per watt
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.94 GHz vs 3.6 GHz Around 10% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of Intel Core2 Quad Q6600

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core2 Quad Q6600

Report a correction
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.52 GHz vs 3.19 GHz More than 10% better overclocked clock speed (Air)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E5420 vs Core2 Quad Q6600

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E5420
5,821
Core2 Quad Q6600
4,490

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E5420
1,317
Core2 Quad Q6600
1,306

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E5420
106,200 MB/s
Core2 Quad Q6600
102,800 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E5420
4,529
Core2 Quad Q6600
4,161

GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E5420
6,104
Core2 Quad Q6600
4,541

GeekBench

Xeon E5420
6,104
Core2 Quad Q6600
5,918

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Xeon E5420
3,534
Core2 Quad Q6600
2,970

PassMark (Single Core)

Xeon E5420
1,073
Core2 Quad Q6600
924

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

 Xeon E5420  vs
Core2 Quad Q6600 
Clock speed 2.5 GHz 2.4 GHz
Cores Quad core Quad core
Socket type
LGA 771
LGA 775

features
Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing No No
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 105W
Annual home energy cost 19.27 $/year 25.29 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 70.08 $/year 91.98 $/year
Performance per watt 1.78 pt/W 1.19 pt/W
Typical power consumption 65W 85.31W

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

details

 Xeon E5420  vs
Core2 Quad Q6600 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 4
L2 cache 12 MB 8 MB
L2 cache per core 3 MB/core 2 MB/core
Manufacture process 45 nm 65 nm
Transistor count 820,000,000 582,000,000
Max CPUs 2 1
Clock multiplier 7 9
Voltage range 0.85 - 1.35V 0.85 - 1.5V
Operating temperature Unknown - 67°C Unknown - 62.2°C

overclocking
Overclocked clock speed 3.19 GHz 3.52 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.94 GHz 3.6 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.19 GHz 3.52 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
Report a correction
Intel Core2 Quad Q6600
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

Showing 1 comment.
nolan (08:37 AM, May 16, 2017)
E5420 is a great little cpu. I have 2 and am considering delidding 1 of them. Will post results online and comment a link.
comments powered by Disqus

features

information

  • terms and privacy
  • about
  • blog

on the web

CPUBoss