Winner
Intel Xeon X5675
CPUBoss recommends the Intel Xeon X5675 based on its performance, single-core performance, cost to run and value.
See full details | Intel Xeon X5675 vs X5365 |
![]() | Much better PassMark score 8,527 | ![]() | Much better PassMark (Single core) score 1,405 |
![]() | More cores 6 | ![]() | Much better performance per watt 8.89 pt/W |
![]() | Much more l2 cache 8 MB | ![]() | Much more l2 cache per core 2 MB/core |
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 |
5.5 | CPUBoss Score |
Combination of all six facets | |
Winner |
| |||||||
Much better PassMark score | 8,527 | vs | 3,491 | Around 2.5x better PassMark score | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Much better PassMark (Single core) score | 1,405 | vs | 1,169 | More than 20% better PassMark (Single core) score | |||
More cores | 6 | vs | 4 | 2 more cores; run more applications at once | |||
Much better performance per watt | 8.89 pt/W | vs | 1.22 pt/W | More than 7.2x better performance per watt | |||
Much higher Maximum operating temperature | 81.3 °C | vs | 63 °C | Around 30% higher Maximum operating temperature | |||
More threads | 12 | vs | 4 | Three times as many threads | |||
Significantly newer manufacturing process | 32 nm | vs | 65 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.29 GHz | vs | 3.4 GHz | More than 25% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
Much lower typical power consumption | 77.19W | vs | 121.88W | More than 35% lower typical power consumption | |||
Supports trusted computing | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing | |||
Higher clock speed | 3.06 GHz | vs | 3 GHz | Almost the same | |||
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.77 GHz | vs | 3 GHz | Around 60% better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
Much lower annual commercial energy cost | 83.22 $/year | vs | 131.4 $/year | More than 35% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
Much lower annual home energy cost | 22.89 $/year | vs | 36.13 $/year | More than 35% lower annual home energy cost | |||
Newer | Feb, 2011 | vs | Aug, 2007 | Release date over 3 years later | |||
| |||||||
Much more l2 cache | 8 MB | vs | 2 MB | 4x 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 | 0.33 MB/core | More than 6x more l2 cache per core |
summary | Xeon X5675 | vs | X5365 |
---|---|---|---|
Clock speed | 3.06 GHz | 3 GHz | |
Cores | Hexa core | Quad core | |
Socket type | |||
LGA 1366 | |||
LGA 771 | |||
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 | 150W | |
Annual home energy cost | 22.89 $/year | 36.13 $/year | |
Annual commercial energy cost | 83.22 $/year | 131.4 $/year | |
Performance per watt | 8.89 pt/W | 1.22 pt/W | |
Typical power consumption | 77.19W | 121.88W |
details | Xeon X5675 | vs | X5365 |
---|---|---|---|
Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
Threads | 12 | 4 | |
L2 cache | 2 MB | 8 MB | |
L2 cache per core | 0.33 MB/core | 2 MB/core | |
Manufacture process | 32 nm | 65 nm | |
Max CPUs | 2 | 2 | |
Clock multiplier | 23 | 9 | |
Voltage range | 0.75 - 1.35V | 1 - 1.5V | |
Operating temperature | Unknown - 81.3°C | Unknown - 63°C | |
overclocking | |||
Overclocked clock speed | 4.29 GHz | 3.4 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.77 GHz | 3 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.29 GHz | 3.4 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 | FSB | |
Number of links | 2 | 1 | |
Clock speed | 3,200 MHz | 1,333 MHz |
Intel Xeon X5675 ![]() | Intel Xeon X5365 ![]() |
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$1,417 | $1,670 | |
X5675 vs X5690 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$1,417 | $1,443 | |
X5675 vs X5670 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$1,417 | $520 | |
X5675 vs X5650 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$1,417 | $248 | |
X5675 vs 4770K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$1,417 | $1,666 | |
X5675 vs X5680 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$1,417 | $240 | |
X5675 vs 3770 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$1,417 | $350 | |
X5675 vs 6700K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$305 | $300 | |
W3520 vs 2500 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$272 | $350 | |
4790K vs 6700K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
4200U vs 6410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
6200U vs 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$134 | $225 | |
847 vs 3217U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$275 | $161 | |
4005U vs N3540 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$180 | ||
3470 vs 5200 | ||