Intel Core i5-2405S vs Intel Xeon X3470 Comparison

The Intel Xeon X3470 and Intel Core i5-2405S are two end-of-life processors from different eras, and the benchmark data reveals a surprisingly consistent, though narrow, victory for the newer Core i5. Across the five Cinebench tests, the Core i5-2405S wins every single matchup, but the margins are remarkably slim. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i5-2405S scores 291 against the Xeon’s 287, a delta of -1.4% from the Xeon’s perspective. The pattern holds in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the i5-2405S posts 1213 versus 1199, and in single-core R20, it leads 171 to 169. The largest gap appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the i5-2405S reaches 2890 compared to the Xeon’s 2857, a 1.1% difference. Even in single-core R23, the i5-2405S edges ahead 408 to 403. The data is clear: the i5-2405S wins all five head-to-head benchmarks, though the Xeon X3470 never trails by more than 1.4%.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking observation from the head-to-head data is not the winner, but the consistency of the margins. Every single Cinebench test—whether multi-core or single-core, whether R15, R20, or R23—shows the Core i5-2405S ahead by roughly 1.1% to 1.4%. This uniformity suggests an architectural efficiency advantage rather than a raw clock speed dominance. The Xeon X3470 has a higher base clock at 2.93 GHz and a higher boost at 3.60 GHz, yet it still loses. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the i5-2405S scores 1213 against 1199, a -1.2% delta. The single-core R20 test shows 171 versus 169, also -1.2%. This is a strange result for a chip with a lower boost clock, indicating the Sandy Bridge architecture in the i5-2405S executes instructions more efficiently per cycle than the older Nehalem design.

The multi-core tests are particularly telling because the Xeon X3470 has a significant theoretical advantage: it supports 8 threads via Hyper-Threading, while the i5-2405S is limited to 4 threads. Yet in Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i5-2405S still wins 291 to 287. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the gap widens slightly to 2890 versus 2857. The Xeon’s 8 threads should help in heavily parallel workloads, but the data shows the i5-2405S’s newer cores overcome that deficit. The average benchmark score reinforces this: the i5-2405S sits at 991, while the Xeon X3470 is at 983, a difference of less than 1%. The percentile rankings also reflect this, with the i5-2405S at the 27th percentile of all CPUs and the Xeon at the 26th.

Looking at the nearest rivals provides context for these scores. The Xeon X3470’s average of 983 ties it exactly with the Intel Core i3-4370T, and it sits just 0.1% below the Core i3-4130T and Core i7-875K. The i5-2405S’s average of 991 places it 0.2% below the Intel Core i7-960, Core i7-965, Xeon W3565, and AMD Phenom II X6 1065T. This means both processors are clustered in a tight performance band, but the i5-2405S consistently sits at the higher end of that cluster. For the Xeon X3470, this is a disappointing result given its server-oriented positioning and higher TDP of 95 watts.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most benchmarks in the head-to-head data?

A: The Intel Core i5-2405S wins all five head-to-head Cinebench tests. It takes Cinebench R15 multi-core (291 vs 287), R20 multi-core (1213 vs 1199), R20 single-core (171 vs 169), R23 multi-core (2890 vs 2857), and R23 single-core (408 vs 403).

Q: How does the Xeon X3470’s multi-threading affect its benchmark scores?

A: Despite having 8 threads compared to the Core i5-2405S’s 4 threads, the Xeon X3470 still loses every multi-core test. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 2857 versus 2890 for the i5-2405S, indicating that the newer Sandy Bridge architecture’s per-core efficiency outweighs the Xeon’s thread count advantage.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two CPUs?

A: The Core i5-2405S has an average benchmark score of 991, while the Xeon X3470 averages 983. This puts the i5-2405S just 0.8% higher overall, and it ranks at the 27th percentile of all CPUs versus the Xeon’s 26th percentile.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock, and does it translate to a win?

A: The Xeon X3470 has a higher boost clock of 3.60 GHz, compared to the Core i5-2405S’s 3.30 GHz. Despite this advantage, the Xeon loses all benchmark comparisons, including single-core tests where clock speed is most influential.

Q: Are there any benchmark tests where the Xeon X3470 is competitive?

A: The Xeon X3470 is competitive in the sense that margins are very narrow, but it does not win any test. Its closest result is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it trails by only 1.1% (2857 vs 2890).

Q: How do the two processors compare in terms of overall performance percentile?

A: The Core i5-2405S sits at the 27th percentile of all CPUs, while the Xeon X3470 is at the 26th percentile. This places both in the lower-middle range of processor performance, though the i5-2405S holds a slight edge.

The Verdict

Based strictly on benchmark data, the Intel Core i5-2405S is the better performer. It wins every head-to-head test, has a higher average benchmark score (991 vs 983), and achieves this with a lower TDP of 65 watts compared to the Xeon X3470’s 95 watts. The data does not support choosing the Xeon X3470 for raw performance in these Cinebench workloads. The i5-2405S’s wins are narrow, but they are consistent across all five tests, which suggests a fundamental architectural superiority rather than a workload-specific fluke. For any user prioritizing Cinebench-style rendering performance, the i5-2405S is the clear pick.

The Xeon X3470 does have some redeeming qualities in the specification sheet, such as ECC memory support and a server/workstation market segment, but these do not appear in the benchmark results. The benchmark data shows a processor that is marginally slower in every measured scenario. The i5-2405S also includes integrated graphics (Intel HD 3000), which the Xeon lacks entirely, adding functionality without a performance penalty. Within the context of these benchmarks, the i5-2405S is the superior product.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specification fields. The Xeon X3470 uses the Intel Socket 1156, while the Core i5-2405S uses Intel Socket 1155. The Xeon has a base clock of 2.93 GHz and a boost clock of 3.60 GHz, whereas the i5-2405S runs at 2.50 GHz base and 3.30 GHz boost. The Xeon’s TDP is 95 watts, significantly higher than the i5-2405S’s 65 watts. The Xeon supports 8 threads, while the i5-2405S supports 4. The Xeon is built on a 45 nm process with 774 million transistors on a 296 mm² die, while the i5-2405S uses a 32 nm process with 1,160 million transistors on a 216 mm² die. The Xeon has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, but the i5-2405S has only 6 MB. The Xeon supports ECC memory and has a dual-channel DDR3 memory bus with 21.3 GB/s bandwidth, while the i5-2405S has no listed memory bandwidth and no ECC support. The Xeon offers PCIe Gen 2 with 16 lanes, while the i5-2405S offers PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes. The i5-2405S includes integrated graphics (Intel HD 3000), but the Xeon has none. The Xeon has a launch MSRP of $589, while the i5-2405S has no listed launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two chips is generational. The Xeon X3470 is based on the Nehalem architecture with the Lynnfield codename, while the Core i5-2405S uses the Sandy Bridge architecture with the Sandy Bridge codename. The Xeon is built on a 45 nm process node, compared to the i5-2405S’s 32 nm node. This process shrink allows the i5-2405S to pack 1,160 million transistors into a 216 mm² die, whereas the Xeon fits 774 million transistors into a larger 296 mm² die. The Xeon’s L3 cache is larger at 8 MB shared, but the i5-2405S’s 6 MB shared cache is paired with a more efficient core design. Both chips have 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core, but the i5-2405S’s Sandy Bridge cores deliver higher instructions per clock. The Xeon supports ECC memory, a feature absent from the i5-2405S, which reflects its server/workstation market segment. The i5-2405S also adds integrated graphics, a feature entirely absent on the Xeon. The PCIe generation also differs, with the Xeon supporting Gen 2 and the i5-2405S supporting Gen 3, which offers greater bandwidth for expansion cards.

Where Each One Wins

The Core i5-2405S wins in every benchmark category measured. It takes all five Cinebench tests, covering both multi-core and single-core workloads. This makes it the better choice for any application that relies on Cinebench-style rendering performance, whether that is 3D modeling, video encoding, or general productivity. Its lower TDP of 65 watts also makes it more suitable for systems where heat and power consumption are concerns. The i5-2405S’s integrated graphics provide a basic display output without a discrete GPU, which could be useful for simple desktop tasks.

The Xeon X3470, despite losing all benchmarks, has no performance wins to claim from the data. However, its specification sheet suggests it could be preferred in specific scenarios. It supports ECC memory, which is critical for error-sensitive workloads like server databases or financial calculations. Its larger 8 MB L3 cache and 8 threads might benefit certain legacy multi-threaded applications, though the benchmark data does not reflect this. The Xeon’s higher base and boost clocks (2.93 GHz and 3.60 GHz) did not translate to benchmark victories, but they could theoretically help in workloads that are not captured by Cinebench. Its server market segment and PCIe Gen 2 support might align with older workstation motherboards. Ultimately, from the benchmark data alone, the i5-2405S is the winner in every measurable performance test, while the Xeon X3470’s advantages are confined to features like ECC memory that do not appear in the scoring.