CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of L7455 vs E7440 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

No winner declared

Too close to call

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 L7455

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon L7455

Report a correction
More cores 6 vs 4 2 more cores; run more applications at once
Lower typical power consumption 52.81W vs 73.13W Around 30% lower typical power consumption
More threads 6 vs 4 2 more threads
Lower annual commercial energy cost 56.94 $/year vs 78.84 $/year Around 30% lower annual commercial energy cost
Lower annual home energy cost 15.66 $/year vs 21.68 $/year Around 30% lower annual home energy cost
Front view of Intel Xeon E7440

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon E7440

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 16 MB vs 12 MB Around 35% more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Significantly higher clock speed 2.4 GHz vs 2.13 GHz Around 15% higher clock speed
Much more l2 cache per core 4 MB/core vs 2 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
Much more l3 cache 16 MB vs 12 MB Around 35% more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later
Much more l3 cache per core 4 MB/core vs 2 MB/core 2x more l3 cache per core
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.4 GHz vs 2.13 GHz Around 15% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.4 GHz vs 2.13 GHz Around 15% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon L7455 vs E7440

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon L7455
19,744
Xeon E7440
14,135

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon L7455
1,167
Xeon E7440
1,170

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon L7455
108 MB/s
Xeon E7440
102,600 MB/s

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon L7455  vs
E7440 
Clock speed 2.13 GHz 2.4 GHz
Cores Hexa core Quad core
Socket type
604

features

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

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

details

Xeon L7455  vs
E7440 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 6 4
L2 cache 12 MB 16 MB
L2 cache per core 2 MB/core 4 MB/core
L3 cache 12 MB 16 MB
L3 cache per core 2 MB/core 4 MB/core
Manufacture process 45 nm 45 nm
Transistor count 1,900,000,000 1,900,000,000
Max CPUs 32 32
Clock multiplier 8 9
Voltage range 0.9 - 1.45V 0.9 - 1.45V
Operating temperature Unknown - 73°C Unknown - 68°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.13 GHz 2.4 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.13 GHz 2.4 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.13 GHz 2.4 GHz

power consumption

TDP 65W 90W
Annual home energy cost 15.66 $/year 21.68 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 56.94 $/year 78.84 $/year
Performance per watt 2.87 pt/W 2.52 pt/W
Typical power consumption 52.81W 73.13W

bus

Architecture FSB FSB
Number of links 1 1
Clock speed 1,066 MHz 1,066 MHz
Intel Xeon L7455
Report a correction
Intel Xeon E7440
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus