CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of X5675 vs W3550 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

No winner declared

Too close to call

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 X5675

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Xeon X5675

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Xeon X5675

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon X5675

Report a correction
Much better performance per dollar 5.64 pt/$ vs 3.41 pt/$ More than 65% better performance per dollar
Much more l2 cache 2 MB vs 1 MB 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much newer manufacturing process 32 nm vs 45 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much higher Maximum operating temperature 81.3 °C vs 67.9 °C Around 20% higher Maximum operating temperature
Much lower typical power consumption 77.19W vs 105.63W More than 25% lower typical power consumption
Much better performance per watt 8.9 pt/W vs 1.57 pt/W Around 5.8x better performance per watt
Supports trusted computing Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing
Much more l2 cache per core 0.33 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core Around 35% more l2 cache per core
Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 2 vs 1 Twice as many CPUs in SMP configuration
Higher turbo clock speed 3.46 GHz vs 3.33 GHz Around 5% higher turbo clock speed
Newer Feb, 2011 vs Aug, 2009 Release date over 1 years later
More cores 6 vs 4 2 more cores; run more applications at once
More threads 12 vs 8 4 more threads
Better PassMark score 8,527 vs 5,730 Around 50% better PassMark score
Supports more RAM 294,912 MB vs 24,576 MB Supports 12x more RAM
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.25 GHz vs 3.65 GHz More than 15% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 83.22 $/year vs 113.88 $/year More than 25% lower annual commercial energy cost
Much lower annual home energy cost 22.89 $/year vs 31.32 $/year More than 25% lower annual home energy cost
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.51 GHz vs 3.07 GHz More than 45% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of Intel Xeon W3550

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon W3550

Report a correction

CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the W3550 vs the X5675.

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon X5675 vs W3550

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon X5675
25,323
Xeon W3550
8,228

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon X5675
2,418
Xeon W3550
2,134

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon X5675
1,650,000 MB/s
Xeon W3550
140,900 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon X5675
13,025
Xeon W3550
8,181

GeekBench

Xeon X5675
13,025
Xeon W3550
10,739

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Xeon X5675
8,527
Xeon W3550
5,730

PassMark (Single Core)

Xeon X5675
1,405
Xeon W3550
1,357

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon X5675  vs
W3550 
Clock speed 3.06 GHz 3.06 GHz
Turbo clock speed 3.46 GHz 3.33 GHz
Cores Hexa core Quad core
Socket type
LGA 1366

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing Yes No
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 130W
Annual home energy cost 22.89 $/year 31.32 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 83.22 $/year 113.88 $/year
Performance per watt 8.9 pt/W 1.57 pt/W
Typical power consumption 77.19W 105.63W

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1333
DDR3-1066
DDR3-800
DDR3
Channels Triple Channel Triple Channel
Supports ECC Yes Yes
Maximum bandwidth 31,999.98 MB/s 25,599.99 MB/s
Maximum memory size 294,912 MB 24,576 MB

details

Xeon X5675  vs
W3550 
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 nm 45 nm
Max CPUs 2 1
Clock multiplier 23 23
Voltage range 0.75 - 1.35V 0.8 - 1.38V
Operating temperature Unknown - 81.3°C Unknown - 67.9°C

overclocking

Overclock popularity 2 1
Overclocked clock speed 4.25 GHz 3.65 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.51 GHz 3.07 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.25 GHz 3.65 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 QPI QPI
Number of links 2 1
Data rate 51,200 MB/s 19,200 MB/s
Transfer rate 6,400 MT/s 4,800 MT/s
Clock speed 3,200 MHz 2,400 MHz
Intel Xeon X5675
Report a correction
Intel Xeon W3550
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus