Intel Xeon L5215 vs Atom N270 |
Released July, 2008
Intel Xeon L5215
- 1.86 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Intel Xeon L5215
 | Much more l2 cache 6 MB | | Much more l2 cache per core 3 MB/core |
| | More advanced architecture x86-64 | | Has virtualization support Yes |
VS
Released June, 2008
Intel Atom N270
- 1.6 GHz
- Single core
Reasons to buy the Atom N270
| | Lower typical power consumption 2.03W | | Lower annual home energy cost 0.6 $/year |
| | Lower annual commercial energy cost 2.19 $/year |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Much more l2 cache | 6 MB | vs | 0.5 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 | 0.5 MB/core | 6x more l2 cache per core | |||
| More advanced architecture | x86-64 | vs | x86 | A 64-bit architecture allows more RAM to be installed and accessed by the processor | |||
| Has virtualization support | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines | |||
| Higher clock speed | 1.86 GHz | vs | 1.6 GHz | More than 15% higher clock speed | |||
| Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration | 2 | vs | 1 | Twice as many CPUs in SMP configuration | |||
| More cores | 2 | vs | 1 | Twice as many cores; run more applications at once | |||
| Better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 1.87 GHz | vs | 1.6 GHz | More than 15% better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
| |||||||
| Lower typical power consumption | 2.03W | vs | 16.25W | 8x lower typical power consumption | |||
| Lower annual home energy cost | 0.6 $/year | vs | 4.82 $/year | 8x lower annual home energy cost | |||
| Lower annual commercial energy cost | 2.19 $/year | vs | 17.52 $/year | 8x lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
Report a correction
Features Key features of the Xeon L5215 vs Atom N270
clock speed
L2 cache
overclocked clock speed (air)
overclocked clock speed (water)
TDP
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Xeon L5215 | vs | Atom N270 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 1.86 GHz | 1.6 GHz | |
| Cores | Dual core | Single core | |
| Socket type | |||
| LGA 771 | |||
| 437 | |||
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Supports trusted computing | No | No | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | No | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE4 | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE | |||
| SSE4.1 | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 20W | 2.5W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 4.82 $/year | 0.6 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 17.52 $/year | 2.19 $/year | |
| Typical power consumption | 16.25W | 2.03W | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | FSB | FSB | |
| Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
| Clock speed | 1,066 MHz | 533 MHz | |
details | Xeon L5215 | vs | Atom N270 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86 | |
| Threads | 2 | 2 | |
| L2 cache | 6 MB | 0.5 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 3 MB/core | 0.5 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 45 nm | 45 nm | |
| Transistor count | 410,000,000 | 47,000,000 | |
| Max CPUs | 2 | 1 | |
| Clock multiplier | 7 | 12 | |
| Voltage range | 0.85 - 1.35V | 0.9 - 1.16V | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclocked clock speed | 1.87 GHz | 1.87 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 1.87 GHz | 1.6 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 1.87 GHz | 1.87 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 L5215  Report a correction |  Intel Atom N270 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $64 | $32 | |
| N450 vs N270 | ||
 | VS | |
| $64 | $32 | |
| N455 vs N270 | ||
 | VS | |
| $42 | $32 | |
| N2600 vs N270 | ||
 | VS | |
| $69 | $32 | |
| 630 vs N270 | ||
 | VS | |
| $63 | $32 | |
| D525 vs N270 | ||
 | VS | |
| $32 | ||
| N280 vs N270 | ||
 | VS | |
| $17 | $32 | |
| Z3735F vs N270 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $300 | $305 | |
| 2500 vs W3520 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 7th Gen A9-9410 vs 6200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $350 | $272 | |
| 6700K vs 4790K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 6410 vs 4200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $180 | ||
| 5200 vs 3470 | ||
 | VS | |
| $350 | ||
| 7th Gen A12-9700P vs 6700K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $161 | $275 | |
| N3540 vs 4005U | ||
