CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of L5609 vs 2100 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

7.2

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Core i3 2100 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core i3 2100  based on its 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 L5609

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon L5609

Report a correction
Much lower typical power consumption 32.5W vs 98.28W 3x lower typical power consumption
Significantly more l3 cache 12 MB vs 3 MB 4x more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later
More l2 cache 1 MB vs 0.5 MB 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Significantly better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score 7,865 vs 4,786 Around 65% better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score
Much more l3 cache per core 3 MB/core vs 1.5 MB/core 2x more l3 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
More cores 4 vs 2 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Much lower annual home energy cost 9.64 $/year vs 37.88 $/year 3.9x lower annual home energy cost
Supports more RAM 294,912 MB vs 32,768 MB Supports 9x more RAM
Better performance per watt 3.43 pt/W vs 1.41 pt/W Around 2.5x better performance per watt
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 35.04 $/year vs 93.47 $/year 2.7x lower annual commercial energy cost
Slightly better geekbench 3 single core score 2,423 vs 2,258 More than 5% better geekbench 3 single core score
Front view of Intel Core i3 2100

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i3 2100

Report a correction
Much higher clock speed 3.1 GHz vs 1.86 GHz More than 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 1.14 pt/$ vs 0.31 pt/$ Around 3.8x better performance per dollar
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.23 GHz vs 2.83 GHz Around 15% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Higher Maximum operating temperature 69.1 °C vs 63.1 °C Around 10% higher Maximum operating temperature
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.23 GHz vs 1.87 GHz Around 75% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Newer Jan, 2011 vs Mar, 2010 Release date 9 months later

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon L5609 vs Core i3 2100

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon L5609
7,865
Core i3 2100
4,786

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon L5609
2,423
Core i3 2100
2,258

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon L5609
1,510 MB/s
Core i3 2100
153,100 MB/s

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon L5609  vs
Core i3 2100 
Clock speed 1.86 GHz 3.1 GHz
Cores Quad core Dual core
Socket type
LGA 1366
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 40W 65W
Annual home energy cost 9.64 $/year 37.88 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 35.04 $/year 93.47 $/year
Performance per watt 3.43 pt/W 1.41 pt/W
Typical power consumption 32.5W 98.28W

bus

Architecture QPI DMI
Number of links 2 1
Transfer rate 4,800 MT/s 5,000 MT/s

details

Xeon L5609  vs
Core i3 2100 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 4
L2 cache 1 MB 0.5 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 0.25 MB/core
L3 cache 12 MB 3 MB
L3 cache per core 3 MB/core 1.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 2 1
Clock multiplier 14 31
Operating temperature Unknown - 63.1°C Unknown - 69.1°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.83 GHz 3.23 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.87 GHz 3.23 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.83 GHz 3.23 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU None GPU
Label N/A Intel® HD Graphics 2000
Number of displays supported N/A 2
GPU clock speed N/A 850 MHz
Turbo clock speed N/A 1,100 MHz

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1333
DDR3-1066
DDR3-800
DDR3
Channels Triple Channel Dual Channel
Maximum bandwidth 25,599.99 MB/s 21,333.32 MB/s
Maximum memory size 294,912 MB 32,768 MB
Intel Xeon L5609
Report a correction
Intel Core i3 2100
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus