Intel Core i7-2635QM vs Intel Xeon W5590 Comparison

The Intel Core i7-2635QM and Intel Xeon W5590 are both end-of-life Intel processors from different eras and market segments, yet they land in the same performance percentile. The data shows a consistent, narrow advantage for the mobile Core i7 part across every benchmark in the comparison set, despite the Xeon’s higher clock speeds and larger L3 cache.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are unambiguous: the Intel Core i7-2635QM wins all five benchmark comparisons, with the Intel Xeon W5590 never taking a single test. The margins are remarkably tight, however, ranging from 4.4% to 4.7%. In the Cinebench R15 multi-core test, the Core i7 scores 301 against the Xeon’s 288, a 4.5% lead. The Cinebench R20 multi-core result shows a similar gap, with the Core i7 posting 1257 points compared to 1204 for the Xeon, a 4.4% difference.

Single-core performance follows the same pattern. The Core i7-2635QM scores 177 in Cinebench R20 single-core versus 169 for the Xeon W5590, giving the mobile chip a 4.7% edge. The Cinebench R23 results reinforce this trend: the Core i7 achieves 422 points in single-core and 2995 in multi-core, while the Xeon manages 404 and 2867 respectively, each a 4.5% delta.

These narrow margins are striking given the architectural gap. The Xeon W5590 runs at a 3.33 GHz base clock and 3.60 GHz boost, substantially higher than the Core i7-2635QM’s 2.00 GHz base and 2.90 GHz boost. Yet the newer Sandy Bridge architecture of the Core i7 more than compensates for the clock disadvantage. The average benchmark scores reflect this overall picture: the Core i7-2635QM averages 995 points across all tests, while the Xeon W5590 averages 986, a difference of about 0.9%. Both processors sit at the 27th percentile among all CPUs, indicating that despite their age, they remain in the same broad performance tier.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations. The Core i7-2635QM is built on Sandy Bridge, fabricated on a 32 nm process node by Intel, while the Xeon W5590 uses the older Nehalem architecture, specifically the Gainestown codename, on a 45 nm node. This process difference is significant: the Core i7 packs 1,160 million transistors into a 216 mm² die, whereas the Xeon W5590 contains 731 million transistors on a larger 263 mm² die. The newer manufacturing process allows the Core i7 to deliver competitive performance at a much lower thermal envelope.

Both processors feature 4 cores and 8 threads, so the parallel workload capacity is identical on paper. The cache configurations differ, however. Each core has 64 KB of L1 cache and 256 KB of L2 cache in both chips, but the shared L3 cache favors the Xeon: it offers 8 MB shared L3, while the Core i7 has 6 MB shared L3. This 2 MB difference gives the Xeon a theoretical memory hierarchy advantage, yet the benchmark results show the Core i7 still comes out ahead.

The socket and platform targets diverge completely. The Core i7-2635QM uses Intel BGA 1224, a mobile socket, and belongs to the Mobile market segment. The Xeon W5590 uses Intel Socket 1366 and is classified as a Server/Workstation part. This distinction drives several other differences. The Core i7 includes integrated Intel HD 3000 graphics, while the Xeon has no integrated graphics at all. The memory support also differs: the Core i7 uses dual-channel memory with no stated bandwidth figure, while the Xeon W5590 supports DDR3 with triple-channel memory and a specified 32.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, which the Core i7 does not, and includes PCIe Gen 2, a feature not listed for the mobile chip.

The production status is end-of-life for both, with the Core i7 released in January 2011 and the Xeon W5590 released in August 2009. The Xeon carries a launch MSRP of $1600, while no launch price is listed for the Core i7. The part numbers are SR030 for the Core i7 and SLBGE for the Xeon. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is clear: the Intel Core i7-2635QM outperforms the Intel Xeon W5590 in every measured test, albeit by a slim margin of roughly 4.5%. For workloads where Cinebench scores are representative, the mobile Sandy Bridge chip is the stronger performer. The Core i7 achieves this with a 45 W TDP compared to the Xeon’s 130 W TDP, making it dramatically more power-efficient while still delivering higher scores.

The Xeon W5590 does retain advantages in platform features rather than raw compute. It supports ECC memory, which is critical for error-sensitive server or workstation workloads, and offers triple-channel DDR3 memory with a specified 32.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Xeon also has a larger 8 MB L3 cache and a higher base clock of 3.33 GHz. These features make it the choice for systems that require memory integrity or legacy Socket 1366 compatibility, but not for peak CPU throughput.

The Core i7-2635QM wins on every benchmark in this comparison, and the 27th percentile ranking for both processors confirms they are performance peers in the broader CPU landscape. The nearest rivals for the Core i7 include the Intel Core i7-2920XM and AMD Opteron 4226, both at an identical average score of 995, and the Intel Core i3-8130U at 994, just 0.1% behind. The Xeon W5590’s nearest rivals are the Intel Core i7-875K at 984 (0.2% behind), the Intel Core i3-4130T at 984 (0.2%), and the Intel Xeon X3470 at 983 (0.3%). These proximity values show that both chips sit in a dense cluster of similar-performing processors.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on several specification fields. The most obvious is the socket: the Core i7-2635QM uses Intel BGA 1224, while the Xeon W5590 uses Intel Socket 1366. The architecture and codename differ as well — Sandy Bridge for the Core i7 versus Nehalem (Gainestown) for the Xeon. The process node is 32 nm for the Core i7 and 45 nm for the Xeon, with correspondingly different transistor counts of 1,160 million versus 731 million, and die sizes of 216 mm² versus 263 mm².

Clock speeds diverge significantly: the Core i7 has a 2000 MHz base clock and 2900 MHz boost, while the Xeon has a 3330 MHz base clock and 3600 MHz boost. The TDP is 45 W for the Core i7 and 130 W for the Xeon. L3 cache is 6 MB shared on the Core i7 versus 8 MB shared on the Xeon. Memory support is dual-channel for the Core i7, while the Xeon uses triple-channel with a 32.0 GB/s bandwidth figure. The Core i7 includes Intel HD 3000 integrated graphics; the Xeon has none. ECC memory is absent on the Core i7 and present on the Xeon. The market segment is Mobile for the Core i7 and Server/Workstation for the Xeon. The Core i7 has no listed PCIe support, while the Xeon has PCIe Gen 2.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmark tests?

A: The Intel Core i7-2635QM wins all five head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with the Intel Xeon W5590 winning zero.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest delta is 4.7% in the Cinebench R20 single-core test, where the Core i7-2635QM scores 177 versus 169 for the Xeon W5590.

Q: Do both processors have the same core and thread counts?

A: Yes, both have 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Does the Xeon W5590 support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Xeon W5590 has ECC memory support, while the Core i7-2635QM does not.

Q: Which processor has a higher base clock speed?

A: The Xeon W5590 has a 3.33 GHz base clock, while the Core i7-2635QM has a 2.00 GHz base clock.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference?

A: The Core i7-2635QM averages 995 points, while the Xeon W5590 averages 986 points, a difference of about 0.9%.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-2635QM is the winner in raw compute performance. It leads in Cinebench R15 multi-core, R20 multi-core, R20 single-core, R23 multi-core, and R23 single-core. For any application that relies on CPU throughput as measured by Cinebench, the Core i7 is the better part. Its 45 W TDP also makes it suitable for power-constrained mobile systems, whereas the Xeon’s 130 W TDP is more demanding. The Core i7’s integrated Intel HD 3000 graphics provide a display output capability that the Xeon lacks entirely.

The Intel Xeon W5590 wins in platform-level features. It supports ECC memory, which the Core i7 does not, making it the appropriate choice for memory-integrity-critical workloads. Its triple-channel memory bus with 32.0 GB/s bandwidth exceeds the Core i7’s dual-channel configuration in theoretical memory throughput. The Xeon’s larger 8 MB L3 cache, compared to 6 MB on the Core i7, could benefit workloads with high cache locality. The Xeon also operates on Socket 1366, which may be relevant for existing server or workstation platforms, and includes PCIe Gen 2 support not listed for the Core i7.

For users choosing between these two, the data suggests that the Core i7-2635QM is the superior processor for general compute tasks, while the Xeon W5590 is preferable in server or workstation scenarios where ECC memory and triple-channel bandwidth are more important than the modest single-core and multi-core performance edge of the Core i7. Both chips are end-of-life, so availability is limited to the used market, but the benchmark results stand on their own: a 4.5% average performance advantage for the mobile Sandy Bridge part.