CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of X5450 vs E5-2430

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

Passmark and GeekBench (32-bit)

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

Passmark (Single Core)

Cost to Run

Commercial Energy Cost

Value

Performance Per Dollar

CPUBoss Score

Performance, Single-core Performance, Cost to Run and Value

Winner
Intel Xeon E5-2430 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Xeon E5-2430  based on its 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
Front view of Intel Xeon E5-2430

Intel Xeon E5-2430

CPUBoss Winner

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Xeon X5450

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon X5450

Report a correction
Significantly more l2 cache 12 MB vs 2 MB 6x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Significantly higher clock speed 3 GHz vs 2.2 GHz More than 35% higher clock speed
Much more l2 cache per core 3 MB/core vs 0.33 MB/core 9x more l2 cache per core
Much better performance per dollar 9.15 pt/$ vs 2 pt/$ More than 4.5x better performance per dollar
Better PassMark (Single core) score 1,274 vs 955 Around 35% better PassMark (Single core) score
Front view of Intel Xeon E5-2430

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon E5-2430

Report a correction
Supports trusted computing Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing
Newer manufacturing process 32 nm vs 45 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Significantly better geekbench (32-bit) score 14,657 vs 5,262 More than 2.8x better geekbench (32-bit) score
Newer May, 2012 vs Nov, 2007 Release date over 4 years later
Lower typical power consumption 77.19W vs 97.5W More than 20% lower typical power consumption
Better PassMark score 7,604 vs 4,202 More than 80% better PassMark score
Better performance per watt 12.05 pt/W vs 5.27 pt/W More than 2.2x better performance per watt
More cores 6 vs 4 2 more cores; run more applications at once
More threads 12 vs 4 Three times as many threads
Lower annual home energy cost 22.89 $/year vs 28.91 $/year More than 20% lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 83.22 $/year vs 105.12 $/year More than 20% lower annual commercial energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon X5450 vs E5-2430

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon X5450
5,262
Xeon E5-2430
14,657

GeekBench

Xeon X5450
7,408
Xeon E5-2430
14,657

Passmark

Xeon X5450
4,202
Xeon E5-2430
7,604

Passmark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon X5450  vs
E5-2430 
Clock speed 3 GHz 2.2 GHz
Cores Quad core Hexa core

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 95W
Annual home energy cost 28.91 $/year 22.89 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 105.12 $/year 83.22 $/year
Performance per watt 5.27 pt/W 12.05 pt/W
Typical power consumption 97.5W 77.19W

details

Xeon X5450  vs
E5-2430 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 12
L2 cache 12 MB 2 MB
L2 cache per core 3 MB/core 0.33 MB/core
Manufacture process 45 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 2 2
Voltage range 0.85 - 1.35V 0.6 - 1.35V

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 QPI
Number of links 1 1
Clock speed 1,333 MHz 3,600 MHz
Intel Xeon X5450
Report a correction
Intel Xeon E5-2430
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus