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

Intel Xeon L5639

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Xeon L5639

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Xeon L5639

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon L5639

Report a correction
Significantly more l2 cache 2 MB vs 1 MB 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much lower typical power consumption 48.75W vs 135.63W 2.8x lower typical power consumption
Much newer manufacturing process 32 nm vs 45 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much better performance per dollar 2.23 pt/$ vs 0.61 pt/$ Around 3.8x better performance per dollar
Much better performance per watt 11.16 pt/W vs 1.2 pt/W More than 9.2x better performance per watt
More l3 cache 12 MB vs 8 MB 50% more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later
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 14.45 $/year vs 48.38 $/year 3.3x lower annual home energy cost
More cores 6 vs 4 2 more cores; run more applications at once
More threads 12 vs 8 4 more threads
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 52.56 $/year vs 134.55 $/year 2.6x lower annual commercial energy cost
Better PassMark score 7,021 vs 4,958 More than 40% better PassMark score
More l2 cache per core 0.33 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core Around 35% more l2 cache per core
Front view of Intel Core i7 920

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i7 920

Report a correction
Higher clock speed 2.66 GHz vs 2.13 GHz Around 25% higher clock speed
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.22 GHz vs 3.46 GHz More than 20% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.22 GHz vs 2.13 GHz Around 2x better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon L5639 vs Core i7 920

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon L5639
14,645
Core i7 920
7,014

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon L5639
2,085
Core i7 920
1,959

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon L5639
1,390,000 MB/s
Core i7 920
143,700 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon L5639
9,881
Core i7 920
7,125

GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon L5639
13,956
Core i7 920
7,791

GeekBench

Xeon L5639
13,956
Core i7 920
9,242

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Xeon L5639
7,021
Core i7 920
4,958

PassMark (Single Core)

Xeon L5639
1,125
Core i7 920
1,164

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon L5639  vs
Core i7 920 
Clock speed 2.13 GHz 2.66 GHz
Cores Hexa core Quad core
Socket type
LGA 1366

features

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

bus

Architecture QPI QPI
Number of links 2 1
Data rate 46,928 MB/s 19,200 MB/s
Transfer rate 5,860 MT/s 4,800 MT/s
Clock speed 2,933 MHz 2,400 MHz

details

Xeon L5639  vs
Core i7 920 
Threads 12 8
L2 cache 2 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 0.33 MB/core 0.25 MB/core
L3 cache 12 MB 8 MB
L3 cache per core 2 MB/core 2 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nm 45 nm
Max CPUs 2 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 3.46 GHz 4.22 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.13 GHz 4.22 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.46 GHz 4.22 GHz

power consumption

TDP 60W 130W
Annual home energy cost 14.45 $/year 48.38 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 52.56 $/year 134.55 $/year
Performance per watt 11.16 pt/W 1.2 pt/W
Typical power consumption 48.75W 135.63W
Intel Xeon L5639
Report a correction
Intel Core i7 920
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus