Intel Core i3-5157U vs Intel Xeon X5550 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data presents a remarkably consistent picture: the Intel Xeon X5550 wins every single head-to-head comparison against the Intel Core i3-5157U, across all five Cinebench tests. The margin of victory is strikingly uniform, hovering around 17% in every workload. This consistency suggests a fundamental performance gap rather than a workload-specific advantage.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Xeon X5550 scores 259 against the Core i3-5157U's 222, a 16.7% advantage. The multicore gap widens slightly in Cinebench R20, where the Xeon posts 1083 versus 925, a 17.1% lead. Cinebench R23 multicore shows the same pattern: 2580 for the Xeon against 2203 for the i3, again a 17.1% difference. These multicore results are particularly telling because they reflect the Xeon's additional physical cores and threads: four cores with eight threads against the i3's two cores with four threads.

The single-core results are more surprising. Despite the Core i3-5157U being built on a much newer process node and having a newer architecture, the Xeon X5550 still leads in single-threaded workloads. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the Xeon scores 152 against the i3's 130, a 16.9% margin. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 364 versus 311, a 17% lead. This is notable because single-threaded performance typically favors newer architectures with higher instructions per clock, yet the data shows the older Xeon maintaining its advantage even here.

The average benchmark score reinforces the overall picture. The Xeon X5550 carries an average score of 888 across all recorded benchmarks, while the Core i3-5157U averages 877. The Xeon also sits at the 24th percentile of all CPUs in the database, one point ahead of the i3's 23rd percentile. Both processors occupy the lower-middle range of the performance spectrum, but the Xeon consistently edges ahead.

Looking at the nearest rivals provides additional context. The Xeon X5550's average score of 888 places it exactly level with the Intel Core i3-6100, with a 0% delta. It is also within 0.1% of the Intel Pentium G4560T and within 0.2% of both the AMD PRO A8-8650B and the Intel Core i7-860. The Core i3-5157U, meanwhile, sits at 877, trailing the AMD Ryzen 3 2300U by 0.3%, the AMD PRO A12-8870E by 0.4%, the Intel Core i3-1000NG4 by 0.4%, and the AMD Phenom II X6 1035T by 0.5%. These rival comparisons show both chips clustered in similar performance territory, but the Xeon's position at the top of its cluster and the i3's position near the bottom of its own cluster reflects the consistent head-to-head margin.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is substantial, spanning six years of Intel development. The Xeon X5550 belongs to the Nehalem generation, codenamed Gainestown, and was released in March 2009. It is built on Intel's 45 nm process with 731 million transistors on a 263 mm² die. The Core i3-5157U, by contrast, is a Broadwell part, codenamed Broadwell-U, released in February 2015. It uses a 14 nm process and packs 1,900 million transistors into a much smaller 133 mm² die. The transistor density difference is dramatic: the newer chip crams roughly 2.6 times more transistors into half the die area.

Core configuration differs fundamentally. The Xeon provides four physical cores with Hyper-Threading for eight threads. The Core i3 provides two physical cores with Hyper-Threading for four threads. This doubling of thread count is the primary driver behind the Xeon's multicore wins. Cache hierarchies also diverge: both share 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, but the Xeon offers 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core i3 has only 3 MB shared. The Xeon's larger cache likely helps it maintain competitiveness in single-threaded tests despite its older architecture.

Memory subsystems differ as well. The Xeon supports triple-channel DDR3 memory, while the Core i3 uses dual-channel DDR3. The i3 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s; the Xeon's bandwidth is not recorded in the database. The Xeon supports ECC memory, a server-oriented feature, while the Core i3 does not. The Xeon uses the Intel Socket 1366 platform, designed for server and workstation motherboards, while the Core i3 uses the BGA 1168 socket, a mobile package soldered directly to the board.

The integrated graphics situation is one-sided. The Core i3-5157U includes Intel Iris 6100 integrated graphics, while the Xeon X5550 has no integrated graphics at all. This makes the i3 a complete system-on-chip solution for mobile devices, while the Xeon requires a discrete graphics card. The Core i3 also has a notable feature absent from the Xeon: 12 PCIe Gen 2 lanes (CPU only), while the Xeon's PCIe configuration is simply listed as Gen 2 without lane count in the database.

Power consumption tells a story of two very different design philosophies. The Xeon X5550 has a TDP of 95 watts, appropriate for a server processor with high sustained load capability. The Core i3-5157U sips just 28 watts, optimized for thin-and-light laptops where heat and battery life matter more than raw throughput. The Xeon's base clock is 2.67 GHz with a boost clock of 3.07 GHz. The Core i3 runs at 2.50 GHz with no boost clock recorded. Interestingly, the Xeon's higher clock speeds, combined with its larger cache, help explain why it wins even single-threaded tests despite the i3's architectural advantages.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon X5550 wins every recorded benchmark, so the "where each one wins" analysis is necessarily lopsided. The Xeon's advantages are most pronounced in multicore workloads, where its 8 threads against the i3's 4 threads deliver a 16.7% to 17.1% edge across R15, R20, and R23. This makes the Xeon the clear choice for multi-threaded rendering, content creation, and server-type workloads that can utilize all available threads.

What is more interesting is the Xeon's win in single-core tests. With a 16.9% lead in R20 single-core and a 17% lead in R23 single-core, the Xeon demonstrates that clock speed and cache size can partially compensate for architectural age. The Xeon's 3.07 GHz boost clock against the i3's fixed 2.50 GHz, combined with 8 MB of L3 against 3 MB, gives it enough single-thread muscle to overcome the i3's newer Broadwell core design.

The Core i3-5157U does have one unrecorded advantage in the head-to-head comparisons: it alone carries integrated graphics, the Intel Iris 6100, and it alone has a recorded memory bandwidth figure of 29.9 GB/s. The i3 also has a much lower TDP at 28 watts, which matters in mobile contexts, and it has 12 dedicated PCIe Gen 2 lanes. However, in pure CPU benchmark terms, the database records zero wins for the Core i3. Its only other advantage is the Geekbench scores recorded for it alone: 1568 multicore and 778 single-core, but no comparable Xeon Geekbench scores exist in the database for direct comparison.

The Verdict

The data points decisively toward the Intel Xeon X5550 for anyone prioritizing raw CPU performance. It wins every recorded benchmark by roughly 17%, whether the workload is single-threaded or multi-threaded. Its 4-core, 8-thread configuration, 8 MB of L3 cache, and higher clock speeds combine to overcome the Core i3-5157U's architectural youth. The Xeon's 95-watt TDP and server platform requirements make it suitable for systems where power consumption is not the primary concern. Its ECC memory support and triple-channel memory bus further position it for workstation or server duty.

The Core i3-5157U is not without its own logic. Its 28-watt TDP makes it dramatically more power-efficient, and its integrated Iris 6100 graphics eliminate the need for a discrete GPU. The mobile BGA 1168 package and dual-channel memory with recorded 29.9 GB/s bandwidth suit it to compact laptops. Its 14 nm process with 1,900 million transistors represents a far denser, more modern design. For a user building a desktop workstation or server from the database's perspective, the Xeon is the clear winner. For a mobile or low-power system where integrated graphics are essential, the Core i3 is the only sensible choice between the two, but not because it wins any CPU benchmark.

The percentile ranking tells a similar story with less margin: the Xeon at the 24th percentile versus the i3 at the 23rd percentile. Both are near the lower end of the database's CPU population, and both are end-of-life products. The Xeon's average benchmark score of 888 versus 877 for the i3 reflects a small but consistent overall advantage.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon X5550 has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core i3-5157U has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: How much faster is the Xeon X5550 in multi-core rendering?

A: In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Xeon scores 2580 against the Core i3's 2203, a 17.1% advantage. Similar margins appear in R15 (16.7%) and R20 (17.1%).

Q: Does the newer Core i3 win any single-core benchmarks?

A: No. The Xeon X5550 wins Cinebench R20 single-core with 152 versus 130 (16.9%) and R23 single-core with 364 versus 311 (17%).

Q: What are the TDP differences between the two?

A: The Xeon X5550 has a 95-watt TDP, while the Core i3-5157U has a 28-watt TDP, a difference of 67 watts.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: Only the Intel Core i3-5157U has integrated graphics, specifically the Intel Iris 6100. The Xeon X5550 has none.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Xeon X5550 averages 888 points across all recorded benchmarks, placing it at the 24th percentile. The Core i3-5157U averages 877 points, at the 23rd percentile.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon X5550 | Intel Core i3-5157U |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 4 | 2 |

| Threads | 8 | 4 |

| Base clock | 2.67 GHz | 2.50 GHz |

| Boost clock | 3.07 GHz | None |

| TDP | 95 W | 28 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1366 | Intel BGA 1168 |

| Architecture | Nehalem | Broadwell |

| Codename | Gainestown | Broadwell-U |

| Process node | 45 nm | 14 nm |

| Transistors | 731 million | 1,900 million |

| Die size | 263 mm² | 133 mm² |

| L3 cache | 8 MB (shared) | 3 MB (shared) |

| Memory bus | Triple-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | Not recorded | 29.9 GB/s |

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 2 | Gen 2, 12 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | None | Intel Iris 6100 |

| Market segment | Server/Workstation | Mobile |

| Release date | March 2009 | February 2015 |

| Launch MSRP | None | $315 |

| Part number | SLBF5 | SR26M |