Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 vs Intel Xeon X5470 Comparison

The Intel Xeon X5470 and the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 are two 45 nm, quad-core processors from the same architectural family, both designed for the Intel Socket 771 platform. Despite their shared lineage and near-identical specifications, the benchmark data reveals a consistent, albeit modest, performance advantage for the Xeon X5470 across every recorded test. This analysis examines the recorded measurements to determine which processor holds the edge and for whom each chip makes sense, strictly based on the database results.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon X5470 wins all five head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the Core 2 Extreme QX9775. The margins are narrow, ranging from a 2.9% advantage in Cinebench R15 multicore to a 3.6% edge in Cinebench R20 singlecore, but they are uniform across both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads. The Xeon X5470’s average benchmark score of 839 sits slightly above the QX9775’s 813, reinforcing its position as the stronger performer in this pairing.

However, the practical takeaway is that these are closely matched chips. The largest recorded delta is just 3.6%, which means that in real-world usage, the difference would be difficult to perceive outside of synthetic benchmarks. The QX9775, despite being the older release with a lower base clock, is not left far behind. For a user who already owns a Socket 771 motherboard and is choosing between these two specific processors based on the database, the Xeon X5470 is the clear pick for maximum performance. For someone prioritizing the ability to overclock, the QX9775’s unlocked multiplier becomes the only differentiating factor that matters, as the performance gap is otherwise minimal.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the same fundamental Core 2 architecture, but they are branded and segmented differently. The Xeon X5470 uses the Harpertown codename, while the Core 2 Extreme QX9775 is based on Yorkfield. Both are built on Intel’s 45 nm process node, feature 820 million transistors, and have a die size of 2x 107 mm². The cache layout is identical: 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 6 MB of L2 cache per die, with no L3 cache present on either chip.

The core and thread counts are also the same, with each processor offering 4 cores and 4 threads. The base clock differs slightly, with the Xeon X5470 running at 3.33 GHz compared to the QX9775’s 3.20 GHz. Neither processor has a boost clock. The TDP is another point of divergence, with the Xeon rated at 120 watts and the Core 2 Extreme at 150 watts, meaning the Xeon achieves its higher clock speed at a lower thermal envelope.

The most significant architectural difference lies in platform support. The Xeon X5470 supports both DDR2 and DDR3 memory, with the exact type depending on the motherboard, and uses a dual-channel memory bus. The QX9775 only supports DDR2, also depending on the motherboard, and the database does not record a memory bus specification for it. PCIe support also differs, with the Xeon featuring Gen 2 while the QX9775 is limited to Gen 1. Both processors support ECC memory, which is unusual for a desktop part like the QX9775. The Xeon is also marked as a server/workstation part, while the QX9775 is a desktop processor, and the QX9775 has an unlocked multiplier while the Xeon does not.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results in Cinebench show a consistent pattern of Xeon X5470 victories, but the margins are worth examining closely. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Xeon scores 245 against the QX9775’s 238, a delta of 2.9%. This is the smallest relative gap in the dataset. Moving to Cinebench R20 multicore, the Xeon posts 1024 versus 992, widening the lead slightly to 3.2%. The single-core tests tell a similar story: in Cinebench R20 singlecore, the Xeon’s 144 beats the QX9775’s 139 by 3.6%, and in Cinebench R23 singlecore, the Xeon’s 344 edges out the QX9775’s 333 by 3.3%. The Cinebench R23 multicore result shows the Xeon at 2440 against 2363, a 3.3% advantage.

The fact that the single-core deltas are slightly larger than the multicore deltas suggests that the Xeon’s higher 3.33 GHz base clock provides a small frequency advantage that scales across all workloads. The QX9775, clocked at 3.20 GHz, is consistently behind by roughly 3% in every test, which aligns almost perfectly with the 4% clock speed difference. This indicates that the architectural efficiency of both chips is essentially identical, and the Xeon’s win is primarily a function of its higher operating frequency.

Looking at the broader context from the nearest rivals, the Xeon X5470’s average score of 839 places it in a tight cluster with the Intel Core i5-3380M (838, 0.1% delta), the Intel Core i7-920 (840, -0.1% delta), the Intel Core i5-5200U (838, 0.2% delta), and the Intel Xeon X3450 (837, 0.3% delta). The QX9775’s average score of 813 aligns it with the Intel Core i7-5550U (813, 0% delta), the Intel Xeon X3440 (815, -0.2% delta), the Intel Core i5-L16G7 (816, -0.4% delta), and the AMD A10-6800K (809, 0.5% delta). This shows that while the Xeon X5470 is slightly ahead of the QX9775, both chips are effectively competing in the same performance tier as several much newer mobile and desktop processors.

Specification Differences

The recorded data shows that the two processors differ in several key specification fields, even though they share the same core architecture. The most obvious difference is the base clock: the Xeon X5470 runs at 3.33 GHz, while the Core 2 Extreme QX9775 runs at 3.20 GHz. This 0.13 GHz difference is likely the primary driver behind the Xeon’s benchmark wins.

TDP is another clear divergence. The Xeon X5470 is rated at 120 watts, while the QX9775 is rated at 150 watts. This means the Xeon delivers higher performance while consuming less power, a notable efficiency advantage.

Memory support differs as well. The Xeon X5470 supports both DDR2 and DDR3, depending on the motherboard, and features a dual-channel memory bus. The QX9775 supports only DDR2, also depending on the motherboard, with no memory bus specification recorded. This gives the Xeon more flexibility for system builders who might have access to DDR3 modules.

PCIe generation is another differentiating factor. The Xeon X5470 supports PCIe Gen 2, while the QX9775 is limited to PCIe Gen 1. This could affect compatibility with newer expansion cards, though the practical impact depends on the rest of the system.

The market segment is also different, with the Xeon categorized as a server/workstation part and the QX9775 as a desktop part. Both support ECC memory, which is notable for the desktop chip. The QX9775 has an unlocked multiplier, allowing for easier overclocking, while the Xeon does not. The release dates differ, with the QX9775 launching earlier and the Xeon following later. The launch MSRP for the Xeon is $1386, and for the QX9775 it is $1499. Both processors are end-of-life, and both use the same socket, process node, transistor count, die size, and cache configuration.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher base clock speed?

A: The Intel Xeon X5470 has a base clock of 3.33 GHz, while the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 has a base clock of 3.20 GHz.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon X5470 and the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 have ECC memory support listed in the database.

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

A: The Intel Xeon X5470 has a TDP of 120 watts, while the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 has a TDP of 150 watts.

Q: Which processor has a better average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Xeon X5470 has an average benchmark score of 839, compared to the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775’s average of 813.

Q: Can either processor be overclocked?

A: The Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 has an unlocked multiplier, meaning it can be overclocked. The Intel Xeon X5470 does not have an unlocked multiplier.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The Intel Xeon X5470 supports DDR2 and DDR3, depending on the motherboard. The Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 supports only DDR2, depending on the motherboard.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the recorded data, the Intel Xeon X5470 wins in every benchmark category. It is ahead in Cinebench R15 multicore (245 vs 238), Cinebench R20 multicore (1024 vs 992), Cinebench R20 singlecore (144 vs 139), Cinebench R23 multicore (2440 vs 2363), and Cinebench R23 singlecore (344 vs 333). This means the Xeon X5470 is the superior choice for any workload that relies on raw processing speed, whether single-threaded or multi-threaded. Its higher base clock and lower TDP make it the more efficient performer, and its support for both DDR2 and DDR3 memory, along with PCIe Gen 2, gives it a platform flexibility advantage.

The Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775, despite losing all five benchmark comparisons, still has a distinct use case. Its unlocked multiplier is a feature that the Xeon X5470 lacks, making it the only choice for users who intend to overclock their processor. The performance deficit is small enough that overclocking could easily erase the Xeon’s lead, potentially pushing the QX9775 past it in real-world usage. Additionally, the QX9775 is categorized as a desktop part, which might make it more appealing to enthusiasts building a Socket 771 desktop system, even though both chips fit the same socket.

For a server or workstation workload where stability and efficiency are paramount, the Xeon X5470 is the clear winner. Its lower TDP means less heat output, and its ECC memory support, combined with its server/workstation market segment, aligns it with reliability-focused tasks. For a desktop enthusiast who values overclocking headroom and does not mind a slightly lower stock performance, the QX9775 is the only option that offers that capability. The data shows that neither chip is dramatically better than the other, but the Xeon X5470 holds a consistent, measurable edge in every recorded test.