CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of X5650 vs X5560

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 X5650 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Xeon X5650  based on its .

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 X5650

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Xeon X5650

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Xeon X5650

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon X5650

Report a correction
Newer manufacturing process 32 nms vs 45 nms A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much better geekbench (32-bit) score 13,028 vs 9,440 Around 40% better geekbench (32-bit) score
Supports trusted computing Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing
More l3 cache 12 MB vs 8 MB 50% more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later
Better PassMark score 7,655 vs 5,478 Around 40% better PassMark score
Higher Maximum Operating Temperature 81.3 °C vs 75 °C Around 10% higher Maximum Operating Temperature
Better performance per watt 13.04 pt/W vs 9.33 pt/W Around 40% better performance per watt
Supports more RAM 294,912 MB vs 147,456 MB Supports 2x more RAM
Marginally newer Mar, 2010 vs Mar, 2009 Release date 11 months later
Slightly more l2 cache per core 0.33 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core Around 35% more l2 cache per core
Front view of Intel Xeon X5560

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon X5560

Report a correction
Much better performance per dollar 14.3 pt/$ vs 9.53 pt/$ More than 50% better performance per dollar
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.57 GHz vs 4.08 GHz More than 10% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon X5650 vs X5560

GeekBench (32-bit)

Xeon X5650
13,028
Xeon X5560
9,440

GeekBench

Xeon X5650
14,009
Xeon X5560
9,440

Passmark (Single Core)

Xeon X5650
1,231
Xeon X5560
1,255

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon X5650  vs
X5560 
Clock speed 2.66 GHz 2.8 GHz
Turbo clock speed 3.06 GHz 3.2 GHz
Cores Hexa core Quad core
Socket type
LGA 1366
Is hyperthreaded Yes Yes

features

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

gpu

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
Memory type
DDR3-1333
DDR3-1066
DDR3-800
Channels Triple Channel Triple Channel
Supports ECC Yes Yes
Maximum bandwidth 31,999.98 MB/s 31,999.98 MB/s
Maximum memory size 294,912 MB 147,456 MB

details

Xeon X5650  vs
X5560 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 12 8
L2 cache 2 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 0.33 MB/core 0.25 MB/core
L3 cache 12 MB 8 MB
L3 cache per core 2 MB/core 2 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nms 45 nms
Max CPUs 2 2
Clock multiplier 20 21
Voltage range 0.75 - 1.35V 0.75 - 1.35V
Operating temperature Unknown - 81.3°C Unknown - 75°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 3.26 GHz 3.31 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.08 GHz 4.57 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.26 GHz 3.31 GHz

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 13.04 pt/W 9.33 pt/W
Typical power consumption 77.19W 77.19W

bus

Architecture QPI QPI
Number of links 2 2
Data rate 51,200 MB/s 51,200 MB/s
Transfer rate 6,400 MT/s 6,400 MT/s
Clock speed 3,200 MHz 3,200 MHz
Intel Xeon X5650
Report a correction
Intel Xeon X5560
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus