CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of L5335 vs 3770K 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

8.6

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Core i7 3770K 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core i7 3770K  based on its performance, single-core performance and value.

See full details

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

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Xeon L5335

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon L5335

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 8 MB vs 1 MB 8x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much lower typical power consumption 40.63W vs 114.97W 2.8x lower typical power consumption
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
Supports trusted computing Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing
Much lower annual home energy cost 12.04 $/year vs 42.19 $/year 3.5x lower annual home energy cost
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 43.8 $/year vs 112.39 $/year 2.6x lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of Intel Core i7 3770K

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i7 3770K

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
Much higher clock speed 3.5 GHz vs 2 GHz 75% 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 2.21 pt/$ vs 0.33 pt/$ More than 6.8x better performance per dollar
Much better PassMark (Single core) score 2,084 vs 800 More than 2.5x better PassMark (Single core) score
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.69 GHz vs 2 GHz More than 2.2x better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Significantly better PassMark score 9,544 vs 2,756 Around 3.5x better PassMark score
Newer Apr, 2012 vs Aug, 2007 Release date over 4 years later
More threads 8 vs 4 Twice as many threads
Better performance per watt 4.55 pt/W vs 2.52 pt/W More than 80% better performance per watt
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.8 GHz vs 2 GHz Around 2.5x better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Higher Maximum operating temperature 67.4 °C vs 60 °C More than 10% higher Maximum operating temperature

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon L5335 vs Core i7 3770K

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon L5335
7,112
Core i7 3770K
13,098

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon L5335
81,900 MB/s
Core i7 3770K
2,620,000 MB/s

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon L5335  vs
Core i7 3770K 
Clock speed 2 GHz 3.5 GHz
Cores Quad core Quad core
Socket type
LGA 771
LGA 1155

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing Yes No
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE4
AVX
SSE3
SSE
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
Supplemental SSE3
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 50W 77W
Annual home energy cost 12.04 $/year 42.19 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 43.8 $/year 112.39 $/year
Performance per watt 2.52 pt/W 4.55 pt/W
Typical power consumption 40.63W 114.97W

bus

Architecture FSB DMI
Number of links 1 1

details

Xeon L5335  vs
Core i7 3770K 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 8
L2 cache 8 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 2 MB/core 0.25 MB/core
Manufacture process 65 nm 22 nm
Transistor count 582,000,000 1,400,000,000
Max CPUs 2 1
Clock multiplier 6 35
Voltage range 1.1 - 1.25V 1.33 - 1.36V
Operating temperature Unknown - 60°C Unknown - 67.4°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2 GHz 4.69 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2 GHz 4.8 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2 GHz 4.69 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU None GPU
Label N/A Intel® HD Graphics 4000
Latest DirectX N/A 11.x
Number of displays supported N/A 3
GPU clock speed N/A 650 MHz
Turbo clock speed N/A 1,150 MHz
3DMark06 N/A 5,339.9
Intel Xeon L5335
Report a correction
Intel Core i7 3770K
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus