CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of W3520 vs 2400 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

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Core i5 2400 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core i5 2400  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 W3520

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon W3520

Report a correction
More l3 cache per core 2 MB/core vs 1.5 MB/core Around 35% more l3 cache per core
More threads 8 vs 4 Twice as many threads
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.38 GHz vs 3.53 GHz Around 25% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.54 GHz vs 3.1 GHz More than 45% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of Intel Core i5 2400

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i5 2400

Report a correction
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 6.84 pt/$ vs 1.31 pt/$ Around 5.2x better performance per dollar
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Higher turbo clock speed 3.4 GHz vs 2.93 GHz More than 15% higher turbo clock speed
Higher clock speed 3.1 GHz vs 2.66 GHz More than 15% higher clock speed
Supports trusted computing Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing
Better PassMark (Single core) score 1,742 vs 1,195 More than 45% better PassMark (Single core) score
Significantly better performance per watt 8.14 pt/W vs 1.38 pt/W Around 6x better performance per watt
Newer Jan, 2011 vs Mar, 2009 Release date over 1 years later
Lower typical power consumption 93.6W vs 105.63W More than 10% lower typical power consumption
Higher Maximum operating temperature 72.6 °C vs 67.9 °C More than 5% higher Maximum operating temperature
Lower annual home energy cost 27.75 $/year vs 31.32 $/year More than 10% lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 100.92 $/year vs 113.88 $/year More than 10% lower annual commercial energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon W3520 vs Core i5 2400

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon W3520
7,257
Core i5 2400
8,298

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon W3520
1,935
Core i5 2400
2,638

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon W3520
117,600 MB/s
Core i5 2400
2,260,000 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon W3520
6,599
Core i5 2400
8,258

GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon W3520
7,836
Core i5 2400
9,093

GeekBench

Xeon W3520
9,166
Core i5 2400
10,769

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Xeon W3520
5,064
Core i5 2400
5,897

PassMark (Single Core)

Xeon W3520
1,195
Core i5 2400
1,742

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon W3520  vs
Core i5 2400 
Clock speed 2.66 GHz 3.1 GHz
Turbo clock speed 2.93 GHz 3.4 GHz
Cores Quad core Quad core
Socket type
LGA 1366
LGA 1155

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing No Yes
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 130W 95W
Annual home energy cost 31.32 $/year 27.75 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 113.88 $/year 100.92 $/year
Performance per watt 1.38 pt/W 8.14 pt/W
Typical power consumption 105.63W 93.6W

bus

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

details

Xeon W3520  vs
Core i5 2400 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 8 4
L2 cache 1 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 0.25 MB/core
L3 cache 8 MB 6 MB
L3 cache per core 2 MB/core 1.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 45 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 20 31
Operating temperature Unknown - 67.9°C Unknown - 72.6°C

overclocking

Overclock popularity 6 63
Overclocked clock speed 4.38 GHz 3.53 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.54 GHz 3.1 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.38 GHz 3.53 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
Supports ECC Yes No
Maximum bandwidth 25,599.99 MB/s 21,333.32 MB/s
Maximum memory size 24,576 MB 32,768 MB
Intel Xeon W3520
Report a correction
Intel Core i5 2400
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus