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!
Front view of Intel Core i5 3230M

Intel Core i5 3230M

CPUBoss Winner

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Xeon L5310

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon L5310

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 8 MB vs 0.5 MB 16x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much more l2 cache per core 2 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 8x more l2 cache per core
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
Front view of Intel Core i5 3230M

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i5 3230M

Report a correction
Much newer manufacturing process 22 nm vs 65 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Significantly higher clock speed 2.6 GHz vs 1.6 GHz Around 65% higher clock speed
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Much better performance per dollar 1.93 pt/$ vs 0.3 pt/$ Around 6.5x better performance per dollar
Much better performance per watt 12.42 pt/W vs 1.65 pt/W More than 7.5x better performance per watt
Much higher Maximum operating temperature 105 °C vs 60 °C 75% higher Maximum operating temperature
Significantly better PassMark (Single core) score 1,583 vs 641 Around 2.5x better PassMark (Single core) score
Newer Jan, 2013 vs Mar, 2007 Release date over 5 years later
Lower typical power consumption 28.44W vs 40.63W 30% lower typical power consumption
Better PassMark score 3,989 vs 2,274 More than 75% better PassMark score
Lower annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year vs 12.04 $/year 30% lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 30.66 $/year vs 43.8 $/year Around 30% lower annual commercial energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon L5310 vs Core i5 3230M

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs


Xeon L5310  vs
Core i5 3230M 
Clock speed 1.6 GHz 2.6 GHz
Cores Quad core Dual core
Socket type
LGA 771
rPGA 988B


Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing No No
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
Supplemental SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes


Architecture FSB DMI
Number of links 1 1


Xeon L5310  vs
Core i5 3230M 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 4
L2 cache 8 MB 0.5 MB
L2 cache per core 2 MB/core 0.25 MB/core
Manufacture process 65 nm 22 nm
Max CPUs 2 1
Clock multiplier 6 26
Operating temperature Unknown - 60°C Unknown - 105°C

integrated graphics

Label N/A Intel® HD Graphics 4000
Number of displays supported N/A 3
GPU clock speed N/A 650 MHz
Turbo clock speed N/A 1,100 MHz

power consumption

TDP 50W 35W
Annual home energy cost 12.04 $/year 8.43 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 43.8 $/year 30.66 $/year
Performance per watt 1.65 pt/W 12.42 pt/W
Typical power consumption 40.63W 28.44W
Intel Xeon L5310
Report a correction
Intel Core i5 3230M
Report a correction


comments powered by Disqus