AMD Phenom II X4 B97 vs Intel Xeon E5450 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data paints a remarkably consistent picture for these two quad-core processors. Across all five recorded Cinebench tests, the Intel Xeon E5450 takes the win every time. The AMD Phenom II X4 B97 does not record a single victory in the head-to-head comparisons.

The margins are narrow but uniform. In multi-core workloads, the Xeon E5450 leads by 2.3% in Cinebench R15 (221 versus 216) and by 2.1% in Cinebench R20 (923 versus 904). The R23 multi-core test shows a 2% advantage (2198 versus 2154). Single-core results follow the same pattern, with the Intel part ahead by 2.4% in R20 single-core (130 versus 127) and by 2% in R23 single-core (310 versus 304).

This consistency suggests the Xeon E5450 holds a small but systematic edge across both lightly threaded and fully threaded rendering workloads. The AMD chip is never faster, but it is also never far behind. In practical terms, the gap is small enough that workload selection or platform-level differences could matter more than raw CPU throughput.

The database's aggregate scores reflect this closeness. The Xeon E5450 posts an average benchmark score of 756, while the Phenom II X4 B97 sits at 741. Both processors land at the 20th percentile among all CPUs in the database, meaning they occupy similar tiers of overall performance relative to the broader market.

Neither chip has a clear use-case advantage based on benchmark wins alone. The Xeon E5450 wins everywhere, but the magnitude of those wins is modest. The AMD part's higher base clock of 3.20 GHz versus 3.00 GHz does not translate into a performance lead in any recorded test. The data indicates the Intel architecture extracts more useful work per clock cycle in Cinebench, even though the AMD processor operates at a higher nominal frequency.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design lineages. The Intel Xeon E5450 belongs to the Core 2 family, specifically the Harpertown generation, built on a 45 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The AMD Phenom II X4 B97 uses the K10 architecture with the Deneb codename, also on a 45 nm node but produced by GlobalFoundries.

Transistor counts and die sizes differ substantially. The Xeon E5450 integrates 820 million transistors across a dual-die package with each die measuring 107 mm², for a combined 2x 107 mm². The Phenom II X4 B97 packs 758 million transistors on a single 258 mm² die. The Intel part uses more transistors spread across two smaller dies, while AMD uses a larger monolithic die with fewer transistors.

Cache hierarchies are organized differently. The Xeon E5450 provides 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 6 MB of L2 cache per die. The Phenom II X4 B97 offers 128 KB of L1 cache per core and 512 KB of L2 cache per core, but adds a 6 MB shared L3 cache. The Intel part has no L3 cache at all. This is a meaningful architectural distinction: AMD's Deneb design relies on a shared L3 pool, while Intel's Harpertown depends entirely on its per-die L2.

Memory support differs as well. The Xeon E5450 supports both DDR2 and DDR3, depending on motherboard implementation, over a dual-channel memory bus. The Phenom II X4 B97 supports DDR3 natively with a dual-channel bus and a recorded memory bandwidth of 21.3 GB/s. The Intel part has no memory bandwidth figure listed in the database.

Both processors support ECC memory and PCIe Gen 2. The Xeon E5450 carries an 80 W TDP, while the Phenom II X4 B97 draws 95 W. The Intel chip targets the server and workstation segment, while AMD positions the B97 as a desktop part. The AMD processor lists integrated graphics as a chipset feature on certain motherboards, whereas the Xeon E5450 has no integrated graphics.

Platform sockets also separate them: the Xeon E5450 uses Intel Socket 771, and the Phenom II X4 B97 uses AMD Socket AM3. The Xeon E5450 launched on November 10, 2007; the Phenom II X4 B97 arrived on May 10, 2010. Both are end-of-life products. The Intel part has a recorded launch MSRP of $915, while the AMD chip has no launch MSRP in the database. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking headroom is limited by board support rather than unlocked ratios.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core rendering?

A: The Intel Xeon E5450 wins all multi-core tests. It leads by 2.3% in Cinebench R15 (221 versus 216), by 2.1% in Cinebench R20 (923 versus 904), and by 2% in Cinebench R23 (2198 versus 2154).

Q: Does the AMD Phenom II X4 B97's higher base clock help it win any benchmarks?

A: No. Despite running at 3.20 GHz versus the Xeon E5450's 3.00 GHz, the AMD part loses every recorded test. The Intel chip wins single-core R20 by 2.4% (130 versus 127) and single-core R23 by 2% (310 versus 304).

Q: How do these processors compare to their nearest rivals in the database?

A: The Xeon E5450's average benchmark score of 756 exactly matches the Intel Core i5-4250U with a 0% delta. It is 0.2% behind the Core i3-5020U and 0.2% ahead of the Core i5-3230M. The Phenom II X4 B97's average score of 741 ties the Intel Core i5-670, sits 0.1% behind the Xeon E5520, and is 0.1% ahead of the Core i7-860S.

Q: Do these chips support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon E5450 and the AMD Phenom II X4 B97 support ECC memory.

Q: What process node are both processors built on?

A: Both use a 45 nm manufacturing process. Intel fabricates the Xeon E5450 at its own foundry, while GlobalFoundries produces the Phenom II X4 B97.

Q: Which processor has a larger cache configuration?

A: The AMD Phenom II X4 B97 has 128 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a 6 MB shared L3 cache. The Intel Xeon E5450 has 64 KB of L1 per core and 6 MB of L2 per die, with no L3 cache.

Specification Differences

The two processors share several core specifications: both have 4 cores, 4 threads, dual-channel memory buses, PCIe Gen 2 support, ECC memory support, and locked multipliers. They diverge on nearly everything else.

Base clock speeds differ, with the AMD part running at 3.20 GHz and the Intel part at 3.00 GHz. Neither has a boost clock. Thermal design power favors Intel at 80 W versus AMD's 95 W. Sockets are incompatible: Intel Socket 771 for the Xeon E5450, AMD Socket AM3 for the Phenom II X4 B97.

The architecture and codename are entirely different: Core 2 with Harpertown for Intel, K10 with Deneb for AMD. The process nodes match at 45 nm, but transistor counts and die sizes do not. Intel uses 820 million transistors across 2x 107 mm² dies; AMD uses 758 million on a single 258 mm² die.

Cache layouts are structurally distinct. The Xeon E5450 offers 64 KB of L1 per core and 6 MB of L2 per die, with no L3. The Phenom II X4 B97 has 128 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a shared 6 MB L3.

Memory support also differs. The Xeon E5450 supports DDR2 and DDR3 depending on the motherboard, with no recorded bandwidth figure. The Phenom II X4 B97 supports DDR3 with a recorded memory bandwidth of 21.3 GB/s. The AMD chip lists integrated graphics as a chipset feature on certain motherboards; the Intel chip has none.

Market positioning separates them further. The Xeon E5450 is a server and workstation part with a launch MSRP of $915, released in November 2007. The Phenom II X4 B97 is a desktop part with no recorded launch MSRP, released in May 2010. Both are end-of-life.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are unambiguous: the Intel Xeon E5450 wins all five recorded comparisons, and the AMD Phenom II X4 B97 wins none.

The largest margin comes in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the Xeon E5450 scores 130 against the Phenom II's 127, a 2.4% advantage. This is the biggest single-core gap in the dataset. The R15 multi-core test shows a 2.3% lead (221 versus 216), the second-largest margin. The R20 multi-core test gives the Intel part a 2.1% edge (923 versus 904). The two R23 tests, both multi-core and single-core, show a 2% difference: 2198 versus 2154 and 310 versus 304 respectively.

The consistency of these margins is notable. Whether the workload is single-threaded or fully multi-threaded, the Xeon E5450 maintains roughly the same 2% to 2.4% lead. This indicates the performance gap is not workload-dependent in the Cinebench suite. It reflects a general architectural efficiency advantage rather than a test-specific quirk.

The aggregate benchmark scores reinforce the head-to-head results. The Xeon E5450 averages 756 across all recorded benchmarks, while the Phenom II X4 B97 averages 741. That 15-point difference works out to roughly a 2% overall advantage, closely matching the individual test deltas.

Both processors sit at the 20th percentile among all CPUs in the database, so neither is a standout performer by modern standards. Their nearest rivals are telling. The Xeon E5450's average score matches the Intel Core i5-4250U exactly, with a 0% delta, and sits within 0.2% of the Core i3-5020U and Core i5-3230M. The Phenom II X4 B97's average score ties the Intel Core i5-670, also with a 0% delta, and sits within 0.2% of the Xeon E5520 and Core i7-860S. The Intel Pentium G4400 trails the AMD part by 0.2%.

In practical terms, the Xeon E5450 is the faster processor in every recorded benchmark. The Phenom II X4 B97 offers a higher base clock and a larger L1 cache per core, along with a shared L3 cache, but none of those advantages translate into a Cinebench win. The database shows a narrow but decisive victory for the Intel part across the board.