CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of X5355 vs E5-1620 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

5.2

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Xeon E5-1620 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Xeon E5-1620  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 X5355

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon X5355

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 8 MB vs 1 MB 8x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much more l2 cache per core 2 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 8x more l2 cache per core
Lower typical power consumption 97.5W vs 105.63W Around 10% lower typical power consumption
Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 2 vs 1 Twice as many CPUs in SMP configuration
Lower annual commercial energy cost 105.12 $/year vs 113.88 $/year Around 10% lower annual commercial energy cost
Lower annual home energy cost 28.91 $/year vs 31.32 $/year Around 10% lower annual home energy cost
Front view of Intel Xeon E5-1620

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon E5-1620

Report a correction
Much higher clock speed 3.6 GHz vs 2.66 GHz More than 35% higher clock speed
Much better PassMark score 9,487 vs 3,266 Around 3x better PassMark score
Much better PassMark (Single core) score 2,117 vs 1,045 More than 2x better PassMark (Single core) score
Much better performance per watt 7.47 pt/W vs 1.37 pt/W Around 5.5x better performance per watt
Much better performance per dollar 3.3 pt/$ vs 0.22 pt/$ More than 15x better performance per dollar
Significantly newer manufacturing process 32 nm vs 65 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Supports trusted computing Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing
More threads 8 vs 4 Twice as many threads
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.93 GHz vs 3.24 GHz More than 20% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.7 GHz vs 2.66 GHz More than 75% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Newer Mar, 2012 vs Nov, 2006 Release date over 5 years later

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon X5355 vs E5-1620

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon X5355
9,667
Xeon E5-1620
12,397

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon X5355
1,408
Xeon E5-1620
3,066

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon X5355
108,000 MB/s
Xeon E5-1620
2,460,000 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon X5355
4,430
Xeon E5-1620
13,003

GeekBench

Xeon X5355
4,430
Xeon E5-1620
13,786

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Xeon X5355
3,266
Xeon E5-1620
9,487

PassMark (Single Core)

Xeon X5355
1,045
Xeon E5-1620
2,117

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon X5355  vs
E5-1620 
Clock speed 2.66 GHz 3.6 GHz
Cores Quad core Quad core
Socket type
LGA 771
LGA 2011

features

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

power consumption

TDP 120W 130W
Annual home energy cost 28.91 $/year 31.32 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 105.12 $/year 113.88 $/year
Performance per watt 1.37 pt/W 7.47 pt/W
Typical power consumption 97.5W 105.63W

bus

Architecture FSB QPI
Number of links 1 0
Clock speed 1,333 MHz 0 MHz

details

Xeon X5355  vs
E5-1620 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 8
L2 cache 8 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 2 MB/core 0.25 MB/core
Manufacture process 65 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 2 1
Clock multiplier 8 38
Voltage range 1 - 1.5V 0.6 - 1.35V
Operating temperature Unknown - 70°C Unknown - 64°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 3.24 GHz 3.93 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.66 GHz 4.7 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.24 GHz 3.93 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

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Supports ECC No Yes
Intel Xeon X5355
Report a correction
Intel Xeon E5-1620
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus