Intel Core i5-5350U vs Intel Xeon X5550 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon X5550 wins every recorded head-to-head comparison. Across five Cinebench tests, the Xeon takes all five victories, while the Core i5-5350U records zero wins. The margin is consistent, hovering around 14.5% to 14.8% in favor of the Xeon in every instance.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Xeon scores 259 against the i5-5350U’s 221, a 14.7% advantage. The R20 multicore test shows a similar gap: 1083 for the Xeon versus 923 for the i5, a 14.8% difference. The R23 multicore results follow the same pattern, with the Xeon posting 2580 compared to 2198 for the i5, again a 14.8% lead.

Single-core performance tells the same story. The Xeon wins Cinebench R20 single-core with 152 points against 130 for the i5, a 14.5% margin. In R23 single-core, the Xeon scores 364 versus 310, a 14.8% gap. The consistency of these margins across both multi-threaded and single-threaded workloads suggests a fundamental performance differential rather than a workload-specific anomaly.

The average benchmark score from the database places the i5-5350U at 903 and the Xeon X5550 at 888. Interestingly, the i5 actually has a slightly higher aggregate average score despite losing every head-to-head test. This discrepancy stems from the fact that the i5 has additional Geekbench results in its dataset (multicore 1671, singlecore 868), which pull its average upward. The Xeon lacks Geekbench entries, so its average is calculated solely from Cinebench runs.

Both processors sit at the 24th percentile in the database’s overall CPU rankings, meaning they outperform roughly a quarter of all recorded processors. The nearest rivals for the i5 include the Intel Core i7-940 (average score 903, 0% delta), the Intel Core i5-4258U (902, 0.1% ahead), and the AMD A10-7860K (904, 0.1% behind). The Xeon’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-6100 (888, 0% delta), the Intel Pentium G4560T (887, 0.1% behind), and the AMD PRO A8-8650B (887, 0.2% behind).

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two parts is substantial. The Core i5-5350U is built on Intel’s Broadwell architecture, specifically the Broadwell-U variant, using a 14 nm process node. It contains 1,900 million transistors on a 133 mm² die. The Xeon X5550, by contrast, uses the older Nehalem architecture (codename Gainestown) on a 45 nm process, with just 731 million transistors spread across a much larger 263 mm² die. The process shrink gave the i5 nearly three times the transistor density despite its smaller physical footprint.

Core counts differ significantly. The i5-5350U offers 2 cores and 4 threads, while the Xeon X5550 provides 4 cores and 8 threads. The Xeon has double the physical cores and double the logical threads. This explains why the Xeon maintains its lead even in multi-threaded workloads despite having a much older architecture.

Cache hierarchies also diverge. Both share the same L1 cache configuration at 64 KB per core and L2 at 256 KB per core. However, the L3 cache tells a different story: the i5 has 3 MB shared L3, while the Xeon carries 8 MB shared L3. The Xeon’s larger cache pool likely helps compensate for its older process node and slower memory architecture.

Clock speeds favor the Xeon as well. The i5 runs at a 1.80 GHz base clock with a 2.90 GHz boost, while the Xeon operates at 2.67 GHz base and 3.07 GHz boost. The Xeon’s boost clock is only 0.17 GHz higher than its base, whereas the i5’s boost represents a substantial 1.10 GHz jump. This suggests the i5 relies heavily on turbo behavior, while the Xeon runs closer to its sustained ceiling.

Memory support differs in channel configuration. The i5 uses dual-channel DDR3 with a recorded bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s. The Xeon uses triple-channel DDR3, though its bandwidth figure is not recorded in the database. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, a feature the i5 lacks entirely. This positions the Xeon for server and workstation duty where data integrity matters more than raw speed.

The integrated graphics situation is one-sided. The i5 includes Intel HD 6000 graphics, while the Xeon has no integrated GPU at all. This is a decisive differentiator for systems that need a display output without a discrete graphics card.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon X5550 wins every benchmark category where both processors have recorded data. Its 14.8% lead in Cinebench R23 multicore (2580 vs 2198) makes it the clear choice for multi-threaded rendering workloads. The 14.7% advantage in R15 multicore (259 vs 221) reinforces this pattern. For single-threaded tasks, the Xeon also prevails, with a 14.5% edge in R20 single-core and 14.8% in R23 single-core. The Xeon’s higher base and boost clocks, combined with its extra cores and larger L3 cache, explain this comprehensive sweep.

The i5-5350U’s strengths lie outside the head-to-head benchmark suite. Its integrated Intel HD 6000 graphics means it can power a display without a dedicated GPU, something the Xeon cannot do at all. The i5’s 15 W TDP represents a radically lower power envelope compared to the Xeon’s 95 W TDP. This makes the i5 viable for compact, battery-powered systems where thermal limits and energy efficiency are paramount. The i5 also uses the BGA 1168 socket, which is designed for mobile integration, whereas the Xeon requires the larger Socket 1366 platform typical of server motherboards.

For memory bandwidth, the i5 has a recorded figure of 29.9 GB/s. The Xeon’s triple-channel configuration suggests potentially higher bandwidth, but without a recorded number, the database cannot confirm this advantage. The Xeon does support ECC memory, which matters for error-sensitive workloads like database servers or long-running compute jobs.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon X5550 has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Intel Core i5-5350U has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Xeon X5550 supports ECC memory. The i5-5350U does not support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: Only the i5-5350U has integrated graphics, specifically Intel HD 6000. The Xeon X5550 has no integrated graphics.

Q: How large is the L3 cache on each processor?

A: The Xeon X5550 has 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The i5-5350U has 3 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor?

A: The i5-5350U has an average benchmark score of 903. The Xeon X5550 has an average benchmark score of 888.

Q: What process node does each processor use?

A: The i5-5350U uses a 14 nm process node. The Xeon X5550 uses a 45 nm process node.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i5-5350U | Intel Xeon X5550 |

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

| Cores | 2 | 4 |

| Threads | 4 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 1.80 GHz | 2.67 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 2.90 GHz | 3.07 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 95 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1168 | Intel Socket 1366 |

| Architecture | Broadwell | Nehalem |

| Codename | Broadwell-U | Gainestown |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 45 nm |

| Transistors | 1,900 million | 731 million |

| Die Size | 133 mm² | 263 mm² |

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

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Triple-channel |

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

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

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

| Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 6000 | None |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Server/Workstation |

| Release Date | 2015-02-28 | 2009-03-29 |

| Launch MSRP | $315 | Not recorded |

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split based on use case. The Xeon X5550 wins every recorded benchmark by roughly 14.5% to 14.8%, making it the superior choice for raw computational performance. Its 4 cores, 8 threads, 8 MB L3 cache, and higher clock speeds deliver consistent wins across both single-threaded and multi-threaded Cinebench tests. For anyone building a workstation or server where processing throughput is the priority, the Xeon is the stronger part according to the measured results.

The i5-5350U, however, offers capabilities the Xeon simply cannot match. Its integrated Intel HD 6000 graphics eliminates the need for a discrete GPU in basic systems. Its 15 W TDP versus the Xeon’s 95 W TDP makes it dramatically more power-efficient. The i5 also uses a newer 14 nm process node with nearly three times the transistor count of the Xeon’s 45 nm design, though this does not translate into a benchmark win. For mobile platforms, low-power embedded systems, or any build where a dedicated graphics card is undesirable, the i5-5350U is the only viable option between these two.

The Xeon’s ECC memory support and triple-channel memory configuration further cement its server pedigree. The i5’s dual-channel setup with 29.9 GB/s recorded bandwidth serves typical consumer workloads adequately but lacks the error-correction features that enterprise environments demand. Both processors sit at the 24th percentile overall, indicating they are mid-range performers in the database’s historical rankings.

Choose the Xeon X5550 if you need maximum compute throughput, ECC memory support, or server-class reliability, and you have the power budget and motherboard footprint to accommodate a 95 W socketed part. Choose the i5-5350U if you need integrated graphics, minimal power draw, or a compact mobile form factor, and you can accept a 14.8% performance deficit in every measured benchmark. There is no scenario in the recorded data where the i5 wins on performance, but there are legitimate scenarios where its feature set outweighs that deficit.