Intel Xeon W3565 vs Intel Xeon 5150
Comparative analysis of Intel Xeon W3565 and Intel Xeon 5150 processors for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Performance, Memory, Compatibility, Security & Reliability, Advanced Technologies, Virtualization. Benchmark processor performance analysis: PassMark - Single thread mark, PassMark - CPU mark, Geekbench 4 - Single Core, Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s).
Differences
Reasons to consider the Intel Xeon W3565
- CPU is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 5 month(s) later
- 2 more cores, run more applications at once: 4 vs 2
- Around 30% higher clock speed: 3.46 GHz vs 2.66 GHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor: 45 nm vs 65 nm
- Around 41% better performance in PassMark - Single thread mark: 1504 vs 1065
- Around 65% better performance in PassMark - CPU mark: 3366 vs 2043
- Around 85% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 1.052 vs 0.568
- 2.5x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 52.603 vs 20.9
- 3.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.342 vs 0.108
- 2.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 1.732 vs 0.807
- Around 16% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 4.841 vs 4.182
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | November 2009 vs June 2006 |
Number of cores | 4 vs 2 |
Maximum frequency | 3.46 GHz vs 2.66 GHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 45 nm vs 65 nm |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - Single thread mark | 1504 vs 1065 |
PassMark - CPU mark | 3366 vs 2043 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 1.052 vs 0.568 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 52.603 vs 20.9 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.342 vs 0.108 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 1.732 vs 0.807 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 4.841 vs 4.182 |
Reasons to consider the Intel Xeon 5150
- 4x more L2 cache, more data can be stored in the L2 cache for quick access later
- 2x lower typical power consumption: 65 Watt vs 130 Watt
- 2.8x better performance in Geekbench 4 - Single Core: 1438 vs 522
- Around 14% better performance in Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core: 2354 vs 2070
Specifications (specs) | |
L2 cache | 4096 KB vs 256 KB (per core) |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt vs 130 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
Geekbench 4 - Single Core | 1438 vs 522 |
Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core | 2354 vs 2070 |
Compare benchmarks
CPU 1: Intel Xeon W3565
CPU 2: Intel Xeon 5150
PassMark - Single thread mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - CPU mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench 4 - Single Core |
|
|
||||
Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) |
|
|
Name | Intel Xeon W3565 | Intel Xeon 5150 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - Single thread mark | 1504 | 1065 |
PassMark - CPU mark | 3366 | 2043 |
Geekbench 4 - Single Core | 522 | 1438 |
Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core | 2070 | 2354 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 1.052 | 0.568 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 52.603 | 20.9 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.342 | 0.108 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 1.732 | 0.807 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 4.841 | 4.182 |
Compare specifications (specs)
Intel Xeon W3565 | Intel Xeon 5150 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture codename | Bloomfield | Woodcrest |
Launch date | November 2009 | June 2006 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $70 | $16 |
Place in performance rating | 2649 | 2718 |
Price now | $69.95 | $455.95 |
Processor Number | W3565 | 5150 |
Series | Legacy Intel® Xeon® Processors | Legacy Intel® Xeon® Processors |
Status | Discontinued | Discontinued |
Value for money (0-100) | 25.02 | 1.13 |
Vertical segment | Server | Server |
Performance |
||
64 bit support | ||
Base frequency | 3.20 GHz | 2.66 GHz |
Bus Speed | 4.8 GT/s QPI | 1333 MHz FSB |
Die size | 263 mm2 | 143 mm2 |
L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | |
L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 4096 KB |
L3 cache | 8192 KB (shared) | |
Manufacturing process technology | 45 nm | 65 nm |
Maximum frequency | 3.46 GHz | 2.66 GHz |
Number of cores | 4 | 2 |
Number of QPI Links | 1 | |
Number of threads | 8 | |
Transistor count | 731 million | 291 million |
VID voltage range | 0.800V-1.225V | B2=1.0V-1.5V, G0=.85V-1.5V |
Maximum core temperature | 65°C | |
Memory |
||
ECC memory support | ||
Max memory channels | 3 | |
Maximum memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | |
Maximum memory size | 24 GB | |
Supported memory types | DDR3 800/1066 | DDR2 |
Compatibility |
||
Low Halogen Options Available | ||
Max number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | 1 |
Package Size | 42.5mm x 45.0mm | 37.5mm x 37.5mm |
Sockets supported | FCLGA1366 | LGA771 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 130 Watt | 65 Watt |
Scenario Design Power (SDP) | 0 W | |
Security & Reliability |
||
Execute Disable Bit (EDB) | ||
Intel® Trusted Execution technology (TXT) | ||
Advanced Technologies |
||
Enhanced Intel SpeedStep® technology | ||
Idle States | ||
Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.2 | |
Intel 64 | ||
Intel® AES New Instructions | ||
Intel® Demand Based Switching | ||
Intel® Hyper-Threading technology | ||
Intel® Turbo Boost technology | ||
Physical Address Extensions (PAE) | 36-bit | |
Thermal Monitoring | ||
FSB parity | ||
Virtualization |
||
Intel® Virtualization Technology (VT-x) | ||
Intel® VT-x with Extended Page Tables (EPT) |