CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of X3380 vs Q9550 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

5.4

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Xeon X3380 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Xeon X3380  based on its performance and single-core performance.

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

Intel Xeon X3380

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Xeon X3380

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Xeon X3380

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon X3380

Report a correction
Higher clock speed 3.16 GHz vs 2.83 GHz More than 10% higher clock speed
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.53 GHz vs 3.99 GHz Around 15% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Better PassMark (Single core) score 1,352 vs 1,199 Around 15% better PassMark (Single core) score
Newer Feb, 2009 vs Jan, 2008 Release date over 1 years later
Front view of Intel Core2 Quad Q9550

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core2 Quad Q9550

Report a correction
Supports trusted computing Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing
Better performance per dollar 0.5 pt/$ vs 0.31 pt/$ Around 65% better performance per dollar
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.03 GHz vs 3.16 GHz Around 30% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon X3380 vs Core2 Quad Q9550

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon X3380  vs
Core2 Quad Q9550 
Clock speed 3.16 GHz 2.83 GHz
Cores Quad core Quad core
Socket type
LGA 775

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing No Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE4
SSE3
EM64T
SSE
SSE4.1
Supplemental SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 95W 95W
Annual home energy cost 22.89 $/year 22.89 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 83.22 $/year 83.22 $/year
Performance per watt 1.81 pt/W 1.51 pt/W
Typical power consumption 77.19W 77.19W

details

Xeon X3380  vs
Core2 Quad Q9550 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 4
L2 cache 12 MB 12 MB
L2 cache per core 3 MB/core 3 MB/core
Manufacture process 45 nm 45 nm
Transistor count 820,000,000 820,000,000
Max CPUs 1 1
Voltage range 0.85 - 1.36V 0.85 - 1.36V
Operating temperature Unknown - 71.4°C Unknown - 71.4°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 4.53 GHz 3.99 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.16 GHz 4.03 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.53 GHz 3.99 GHz

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

bus

Architecture FSB FSB
Number of links 1 1
Clock speed 1,333 MHz 1,333 MHz
Intel Xeon X3380
Report a correction
Intel Core2 Quad Q9550
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus