Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 vs Intel Xeon E5530 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data places the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 ahead in every recorded test, though the margins are consistently narrow. Across the five Cinebench runs, the QX9775 wins all of them, with the Xeon E5530 trailing by margins between 1.5% and 1.7%.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the QX9775 scores 238 against the E5530's 234, a 1.7% lead. That is the largest gap in the entire comparison. The R20 multi-core test shows 992 versus 977, a 1.5% advantage for the QX9775. Single-core results follow the same pattern: R20 single-core gives 139 for the QX9775 and 137 for the E5530, while R23 single-core records 333 versus 328, each a 1.5% edge.

The R23 multi-core test, which is the most demanding workload in this set, shows 2363 for the QX9775 and 2328 for the E5530. The 35-point difference confirms that the QX9775's lead persists even under sustained multi-threaded rendering, not just in short bursts. What is notable is how close these two processors remain despite their architectural differences. The QX9775's higher base clock of 3.20 GHz compared to the E5530's 2.40 GHz (with a 2.67 GHz boost) does not translate into a dominant victory, largely because the E5530 compensates with eight threads versus the QX9775's four.

The average benchmark scores tell a similar story. The QX9775 posts an average score of 813, while the E5530 sits at 801. That 12-point difference places the QX9775 at the 22nd percentile of all CPUs in the database, with the E5530 just one percentile behind at 21. The nearest rivals for the QX9775 include the Intel Core i7-5550U at 813 (0% delta) and the Intel Xeon X3440 at 815 (-0.2%), while the E5530 matches the AMD A10-7700K and Intel Pentium Silver J5040 at 801 (0% delta). These reference points show both processors landing in the same performance tier, despite the QX9775's consistent edge.

Where Each One Wins

The QX9775 wins every benchmark in this comparison, so the use-case split is not about which processor dominates a particular test. Instead, the data points to where each processor's strengths align with different workloads.

For single-threaded tasks, the QX9775 holds a clear advantage. Its 3.20 GHz base clock, combined with a simpler Core 2 architecture, delivers higher raw per-core performance. The R23 single-core score of 333 versus 328 and the R20 single-core score of 139 versus 137 both reflect this. Applications that rely on one or two cores, such as older games or lightly threaded productivity tools, would favor the QX9775.

For multi-threaded workloads, the picture is more nuanced. The E5530 has eight threads versus the QX9775's four, which theoretically should help in heavily parallel tasks. However, the benchmark data shows the QX9775 still wins in multi-core tests, albeit by slim margins. The R23 multi-core score of 2363 versus 2328 indicates that the QX9775's higher clock speed offsets the E5530's extra threads in these specific Cinebench workloads. That said, the E5530's eight threads and larger 8 MB shared L3 cache suggest it could handle thread-heavy server or workstation workloads more gracefully, even if the recorded benchmarks do not reflect a win.

The E5530 also wins on efficiency characteristics that are not directly benchmarked but are part of its specification. Its 80 W TDP is dramatically lower than the QX9775's 150 W, and it supports DDR3 memory with triple-channel bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s, whereas the QX9775 depends on motherboard-specific DDR2 support. For a server or workstation environment where memory bandwidth and power draw matter, the E5530's architecture offers practical advantages that the Cinebench scores do not capture.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded data, the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 is the faster processor in every benchmark test. It wins all five head-to-head comparisons, with margins ranging from 1.5% to 1.7%. Its average benchmark score of 813 exceeds the E5530's 801, and it holds a slightly higher percentile ranking at 22 versus 21.

For users prioritizing raw Cinebench performance, particularly in single-threaded tasks, the QX9775 is the clear choice. Its 3.20 GHz base clock and unlocked multiplier (the E5530 is locked) give it an edge that the data consistently confirms. The QX9775 also launched at a higher MSRP of $1499, reflecting its desktop extreme-tier positioning.

However, the E5530 is not without merit. Its eight threads, 8 MB shared L3 cache, DDR3 support with triple-channel memory bus, and 80 W TDP make it a more balanced option for server or workstation deployments. The E5530's launch MSRP was $530, and its lower power envelope and newer Nehalem architecture (released in 2009 versus 2008 for the QX9775) suggest it was designed for sustained, memory-intensive workloads. The benchmark data shows it trails the QX9775, but only by a small margin, and the E5530's architectural features may matter more in real-world server scenarios than in Cinebench rendering.

The verdict is straightforward: pick the QX9775 for maximum benchmark performance, especially in single-threaded tasks. Pick the E5530 if you need eight threads, lower power consumption, and modern memory support, accepting a small performance deficit in the recorded tests.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 has an average benchmark score of 813, while the Intel Xeon E5530 scores 801.

Q: How much faster is the QX9775 in Cinebench R15 multi-core?

A: The QX9775 scores 238 versus 234 for the E5530, a 1.7% difference, which is the largest margin in any recorded test.

Q: Does the Xeon E5530 win any benchmark?

A: No. The data shows the E5530 loses all five head-to-head tests, with the QX9775 taking wins in R15, R20, and R23 multi-core and single-core tests.

Q: What are the thread counts for each processor?

A: The QX9775 has 4 threads, while the E5530 has 8 threads (4 cores with Hyper-Threading).

Q: How do their percentiles compare?

A: The QX9775 is at the 22nd percentile of all CPUs, while the E5530 is at the 21st percentile.

Q: What is the difference in TDP between the two?

A: The QX9775 has a TDP of 150 W, while the E5530 has a TDP of 80 W, a significant difference favoring the E5530 for power-sensitive setups.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations. The Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 uses the Core 2 architecture with the Yorkfield codename, built on a 45 nm process. It features 4 cores with 4 threads, a 64 KB L1 cache per core, and a 6 MB L2 cache per die (effectively 12 MB total across two dies). The die size is listed as 2x 107 mm², with 820 million transistors. It supports DDR2 memory, depending on the motherboard, and uses PCIe Gen 1. The QX9775 has an unlocked multiplier, making it overclockable.

The Intel Xeon E5530 uses the Nehalem architecture with the Gainestown codename, also built on a 45 nm process. It features 4 cores with 8 threads, a 64 KB L1 cache per core, a 256 KB L2 cache per core, and an 8 MB shared L3 cache. The die size is a single 263 mm², with 731 million transistors. It supports DDR3 memory with a triple-channel memory bus and 25.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth, and uses PCIe Gen 2. The E5530 has a locked multiplier.

The architectural split is stark: the QX9775 is a desktop extreme processor with a high clock speed and large per-die L2 cache, while the E5530 is a server/workstation processor with Hyper-Threading, a shared L3 cache, and newer memory and PCIe technologies. Both support ECC memory, but the E5530's Nehalem design integrates the memory controller with triple-channel DDR3 support, whereas the QX9775 relies on motherboard-dependent DDR2.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show several key differences between the two processors. The QX9775 has a base clock of 3.20 GHz with no boost clock, while the E5530 has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 2.67 GHz. The QX9775 has 4 threads, while the E5530 has 8 threads. The QX9775 has a TDP of 150 W, while the E5530 has a TDP of 80 W.

The sockets differ: the QX9775 uses Intel Socket 771, while the E5530 uses Intel Socket 1366. The cache configurations are different: the QX9775 has 6 MB L2 per die with no L3, while the E5530 has 256 KB L2 per core and 8 MB shared L3. Memory support differs, with the QX9775 using DDR2 (motherboard-dependent) and the E5530 using DDR3 with a triple-channel bus and 25.6 GB/s bandwidth.

The PCIe generation differs: Gen 1 for the QX9775 versus Gen 2 for the E5530. The market segments are also distinct: Desktop for the QX9775 versus Server/Workstation for the E5530. The QX9775 has an unlocked multiplier, while the E5530's multiplier is locked. The launch MSRP values are $1499 for the QX9775 and $530 for the E5530. The release dates are March 2008 for the QX9775 and March 2009 for the E5530. The process nodes are identical at 45 nm, and both are end-of-life products.