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
Front view of Intel Core i5 520M

Intel Core i5 520M

CPUBoss Winner

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Xeon X3350

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon X3350

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 12 MB vs 0.5 MB 24x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much more l2 cache per core 3 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 12x more l2 cache per core
Higher clock speed 2.66 GHz vs 2.4 GHz More than 10% higher clock speed
Significantly better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score 5,746 vs 3,737 Around 55% better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.83 GHz vs 2.86 GHz Around 35% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
More cores 4 vs 2 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.66 GHz vs 2.4 GHz More than 10% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of Intel Core i5 520M

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i5 520M

Report a correction
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
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 2.08 pt/$ vs 0.6 pt/$ Around 3.5x better performance per dollar
Much lower typical power consumption 28.44W vs 77.19W 2.7x lower typical power consumption
Much better performance per watt 13.49 pt/W vs 1.69 pt/W Around 8x better performance per watt
Supports trusted computing Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing
Newer Jan, 2010 vs Jan, 2008 Release date over 2 years later
Much lower annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year vs 22.89 $/year 2.7x lower annual home energy cost
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 30.66 $/year vs 83.22 $/year 2.7x lower annual commercial energy cost
Better geekbench 3 single core score 1,867 vs 1,654 Around 15% better geekbench 3 single core score

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon X3350 vs Core i5 520M

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon X3350
5,746
Core i5 520M
3,737

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon X3350
1,654
Core i5 520M
1,867

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon X3350
131,400 MB/s
Core i5 520M
1,340,000 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon X3350
4,806
Core i5 520M
3,593

GeekBench

Xeon X3350
4,826
Core i5 520M
5,349

x264 HD 4.0

Xeon X3350
51.94 fps
Core i5 520M
25.7 fps

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Xeon X3350
3,898
Core i5 520M
2,380

PassMark (Single Core)

Xeon X3350
1,159
Core i5 520M
1,058

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon X3350  vs
Core i5 520M 
Clock speed 2.66 GHz 2.4 GHz
Cores Quad core Dual core
Socket type
LGA 775
BGA 1288
rPGA 988A

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing No Yes
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

power consumption

TDP 95W 35W
Annual home energy cost 22.89 $/year 8.43 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 83.22 $/year 30.66 $/year
Performance per watt 1.69 pt/W 13.49 pt/W
Typical power consumption 77.19W 28.44W

details

Xeon X3350  vs
Core i5 520M 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 4
L2 cache 12 MB 0.5 MB
L2 cache per core 3 MB/core 0.25 MB/core
Manufacture process 45 nm 32 nm
Transistor count 820,000,000 382,000,000
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 8 18

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 3.83 GHz 2.86 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.66 GHz 2.4 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.83 GHz 2.86 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU None GPU
Label N/A Intel® HD Graphics
Number of displays supported N/A 2
GPU clock speed N/A 500 MHz
Turbo clock speed N/A 766 MHz

bus

Architecture FSB DMI
Number of links 1 1
Intel Xeon X3350
Report a correction
Intel Core i5 520M
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus