Winner
Intel Pentium G2010
CPUBoss recommends the Intel Pentium G2010 based on its performance, single-core performance and value.
See full details Intel Xeon L3110 vs Pentium G2010 |
Released February, 2009
Intel Xeon L3110
- 3 GHz
- Dual core
5 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Intel Xeon L3110
 | Much more l2 cache 6 MB | | Much more l2 cache per core 3 MB/core |
| | Higher clock speed 3 GHz | | Lower typical power consumption 36.56W |
VS
Released January, 2013
Intel Pentium G2010
- 2.8 GHz
- Dual core
7.3 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Pentium G2010
| | Much newer manufacturing process 22 nm | | Has a built-in GPU Yes |
| | Much better performance per dollar 2.24 pt/$ | | Newer Jan, 2013 |
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of L3110 vs G2010 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 | |
| 7.3 | CPUBoss Score |
Combination of all six facets | |
 | Winner |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
| |  | Intel Pentium G2010CPUBoss Winner |
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Much more l2 cache | 6 MB | vs | 1 MB | 6x 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 | 0.5 MB/core | 6x more l2 cache per core | |||
| Higher clock speed | 3 GHz | vs | 2.8 GHz | More than 5% higher clock speed | |||
| Lower typical power consumption | 36.56W | vs | 44.69W | Around 20% lower typical power consumption | |||
| Lower annual commercial energy cost | 39.42 $/year | vs | 48.18 $/year | Around 20% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
| Lower annual home energy cost | 10.84 $/year | vs | 13.25 $/year | Around 20% lower annual home energy cost | |||
| Slightly better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 3 GHz | vs | 2.8 GHz | More than 5% better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
| |||||||
| Much newer manufacturing process | 22 nm | vs | 45 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
| Has a built-in GPU | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required | |||
| Much better performance per dollar | 2.24 pt/$ | vs | 0.48 pt/$ | Around 4.8x better performance per dollar | |||
| Newer | Jan, 2013 | vs | Feb, 2009 | Release date over 3 years later | |||
| Better PassMark (Single core) score | 1,499 | vs | 1,266 | Around 20% better PassMark (Single core) score | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon L3110 vs Pentium G2010
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
PassMark (Single Core)
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Xeon L3110 | vs | Pentium G2010 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 3 GHz | 2.8 GHz | |
| Cores | Dual core | Dual core | |
| Socket type | |||
| LGA 775 | |||
| LGA 1155 | |||
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE4 | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE | |||
| SSE4.1 | |||
| SSE4.2 | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 45W | 55W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 10.84 $/year | 13.25 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 39.42 $/year | 48.18 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 2.61 pt/W | 2.6 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 36.56W | 44.69W | |
details | Xeon L3110 | vs | Pentium G2010 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 2 | 2 | |
| L2 cache | 6 MB | 1 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 3 MB/core | 0.5 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 45 nm | 22 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
| Clock multiplier | 9 | 28 | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclocked clock speed | 3 GHz | 2.84 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 3 GHz | 2.8 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3 GHz | 2.84 GHz | |
integrated graphics | |||
| GPU | None | GPU | |
| Label | N/A | Intel® HD Graphics | |
| Number of displays supported | N/A | 3 | |
| GPU clock speed | N/A | 650 MHz | |
| Turbo clock speed | N/A | 1,050 MHz | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | FSB | DMI | |
| Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
 Intel Xeon L3110  Report a correction |  Intel Pentium G2010 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $130 | $64 | |
| 3210 vs G2010 | ||
 | VS | |
| $150 | $64 | |
| 2100 vs G2010 | ||
 | VS | |
| $179 | $64 | |
| E8400 vs G2010 | ||
 | VS | |
| $75 | $64 | |
| G2020 vs G2010 | ||
 | VS | |
| $125 | $64 | |
| 3220 vs G2010 | ||
 | VS | |
| $76 | $64 | |
| G2030 vs G2010 | ||
 | VS | |
| $70 | $64 | |
| G620 vs G2010 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $300 | $305 | |
| 2500 vs W3520 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 6410 vs 4200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $350 | $272 | |
| 6700K vs 4790K | ||
 | VS | |
| $50 | $125 | |
| 5300 vs 3220 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $180 | ||
| 5200 vs 3470 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 7th Gen A9-9410 vs 6200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $225 | $134 | |
| 3217U vs 847 | ||
