Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 vs Intel Xeon X5482 Comparison

Both the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 and the Intel Xeon X5482 are twin 45 nm quad-core processors from the same era, sharing the same 3.20 GHz base clock and 150 W TDP. Benchmark data shows the two parts are exceptionally close in raw performance, with the Core 2 Extreme winning all five head-to-head comparisons by margins of less than 1.5%. However, the data also reveals that they are aimed at fundamentally different markets, which dictates where each chip makes the most sense.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results paint a picture of near-total parity, but the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 holds a slight edge in every single test. In multi-threaded workloads, the QX9775 leads by a 1.3% margin in Cinebench R15 (238 vs. 235) and by 0.9% in both Cinebench R20 (992 vs. 983) and Cinebench R23 (2363 vs. 2341). The single-threaded results follow the same pattern, with the QX9775 ahead by 0.7% in Cinebench R20 (139 vs. 138) and 0.9% in Cinebench R23 (333 vs. 330). This indicates that the Core 2 Extreme is nominally the faster processor for any compute task, though the differences are so small they are unlikely to be perceptible in real-world use.

The real differentiator is the market segment. The QX9775 is a desktop part, classified under the Core 2 Extreme (Yorkfield XE) generation, and features an unlocked multiplier. This makes it the clear choice for an enthusiast desktop system where overclocking is a priority. The Xeon X5482, by contrast, is a server and workstation part from the Harpertown generation, with a locked multiplier. Its advantage lies in its platform positioning, not its benchmark scores. For a multi-socket server or a workstation motherboard that requires Xeon-class reliability and validation, the X5482 is the appropriate component, despite its slightly lower scores. The data shows the Xeon is the winner in suitability for enterprise deployment, even though it loses on raw benchmark performance.

Architecture Differences

Despite their different names and target markets, the two processors share a nearly identical internal architecture. Both are built on Intel's 45 nm process, contain 820 million transistors, and use a dual-die design with a total die size of 2x 107 mm². They both feature four cores and four threads, with no hyper-threading. The cache layouts are also identical: 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 6 MB of L2 cache per die.

The core architectural differences are limited to the platform and feature set. The QX9775 is based on the Yorkfield XE core and belongs to the Core 2 Extreme generation, while the X5482 is based on the Harpertown core and belongs to the Xeon generation. This difference is reflected in the memory support: the QX9775 supports DDR2 memory, while the X5482 supports both DDR2 and DDR3, with the exact type depending on the motherboard. The X5482 also explicitly lists dual-channel memory bus support, a detail not specified for the desktop part. Another key divergence is PCIe support; the QX9775 uses PCIe Gen 1, while the X5482 features PCIe Gen 2, giving the server chip a more modern I/O interface. Both support ECC memory, but the QX9775's desktop heritage makes this less common in practice, whereas it is a standard requirement for the Xeon's workstation and server role. The X5482 also has a locked multiplier, while the QX9775 is fully unlocked for overclocking.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 is marginally faster. It wins the Cinebench R23 multi-core test with a score of 2363 compared to the Xeon X5482's 2341, a 0.9% difference.

Q: Can the Intel Xeon X5482 be overclocked?

A: No. The Xeon X5482 has a locked multiplier, while the Core 2 Extreme QX9775 is listed as having an unlocked multiplier, making it the only one of the two suitable for overclocking.

Q: Do these processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 and the Intel Xeon X5482 list ECC memory support as a feature.

Q: What is the difference in memory support between the two?

A: The Core 2 Extreme QX9775 supports DDR2 memory, dependent on the motherboard. The Xeon X5482 supports both DDR2 and DDR3, also dependent on the motherboard, and features a dual-channel memory bus.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Core 2 Extreme QX9775 has a higher average benchmark score of 813, compared to the Xeon X5482's 805. This puts the QX9775 in the 22nd percentile of all CPUs, the same percentile as the Xeon.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for these chips?

A: The QX9775's closest rival is the Intel Core i7-5550U, with a matching average score of 813. The Xeon X5482's nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 3 2200U, also with a matching average score of 805.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 | Intel Xeon X5482 |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Generation | Core 2 Extreme (Yorkfield XE) | Xeon (Harpertown) |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

| Release Date | 2008-03-23 | 2007-11-10 |

| Launch MSRP | $1499 | $1279 |

| Memory Support | DDR2 (depends on motherboard) | DDR2, DDR3 (depends on motherboard) |

| Memory Bus | Not specified | Dual-channel |

| PCIe | Gen 1 | Gen 2 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Part Number | SLANYEU80574XL088N | SLANZSLBBG |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a consistent, albeit tiny, advantage for the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 across all tested workloads. The largest gap between the two processors appears in the Cinebench R15 multi-core test. Here, the QX9775 scores 238 against the Xeon's 235, yielding a 1.3% lead. This is the most significant performance delta in the entire comparison and represents the best case for the desktop chip.

The other multi-core tests show a slightly smaller margin. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the QX9775 scores 992 compared to the X5482's 983, a 0.9% difference. The Cinebench R23 multi-core test shows the same 0.9% delta, with scores of 2363 and 2341 respectively. These results confirm that the QX9775 maintains its lead in longer, more modern rendering workloads, but the advantage remains statistically minor.

Single-threaded performance follows the same trend. The QX9775 wins the Cinebench R20 single-core test with a score of 139, just one point ahead of the Xeon's 138, a 0.7% improvement. The Cinebench R23 single-core test shows a score of 333 for the QX9775 versus 330 for the X5482, a 0.9% edge. The data suggests that the architectural similarities between the Yorkfield and Harpertown cores are so profound that performance is essentially identical at the same clock speed, with the QX9775's minor victories likely attributable to slight firmware or platform optimizations rather than a fundamental design advantage. In all five head-to-head benchmarks, the QX9775 is the winner, but the Xeon X5482 is never more than 1.3% behind.