Intel Core i7-2715QE vs Intel Xeon W3550 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a consistent, narrow advantage for the Intel Xeon W3550 across every Cinebench test. The Xeon wins all five head-to-head comparisons, though the margins are small, ranging from 1.2% to 1.5%. This is not a dominant performance gap; it is a pattern of small but uniform leads.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Xeon W3550 scores 279 against 275 for the Core i7-2715QE, a 1.4% difference. The R20 multicore test shows a similar story: 1166 for the Xeon versus 1149 for the Core i7, a 1.5% gap. Single-core results follow the same trend. In R20 single-core, the Xeon posts 164 points, while the Core i7 manages 162, a 1.2% lead. The R23 versions mirror this: 2778 versus 2737 in multicore (1.5% ahead) and 392 versus 386 in single-core (1.5% ahead).

The average benchmark scores in the database reinforce the pattern. The Xeon W3550 carries an average score of 956, while the Core i7-2715QE sits at 942. That is a 1.5% difference in overall performance. The Xeon also ranks slightly higher in the percentile ladder, at the 26th percentile of all CPUs, versus the 25th percentile for the Core i7.

Context from the nearest rivals puts both chips in the same performance class. The Core i7-2715QE trades blows with CPUs like the Intel Core i3-8145U (941 average, 0.1% behind), the AMD Athlon X4 860K (943, 0.1% ahead), and the AMD A8-7670K (944, 0.3% ahead). The Xeon W3550 sits alongside the AMD Athlon X4 870K (956, exactly even), the Intel Core i7-950 (957, 0.1% ahead), and the Intel Celeron N5105 (955, 0.1% behind). In short, both processors occupy a similar performance band, with the Xeon holding a slim but consistent edge in every measured workload.

Architecture Differences

The two CPUs come from different Intel microarchitectures and process nodes. The Core i7-2715QE is built on Sandy Bridge at 32 nm, while the Xeon W3550 uses Nehalem (codename Bloomfield) at 45 nm. The Core i7 integrates 1,160 million transistors on a 216 mm² die, whereas the Xeon packs 731 million transistors on a larger 263 mm² die. The smaller process node gives the Core i7 a transistor density advantage, but the Xeon compensates with a larger shared cache and higher clocks.

Cache configurations differ in the L3 tier. Both chips have 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core. The Core i7-2715QE has 6 MB of shared L3, while the Xeon W3550 has 8 MB of shared L3. That extra 2 MB of L3 cache is one of the Xeon's structural advantages.

Clock speeds favor the Xeon noticeably. The Xeon W3550 runs at a 3.07 GHz base clock and boosts to 3.33 GHz. The Core i7-2715QE has a 2.10 GHz base and a 3.00 GHz boost. The Xeon's base clock is nearly 1 GHz higher, and its boost clock is 0.33 GHz higher. Despite that clock advantage, the Xeon only leads by about 1.5% in the benchmarks, which suggests the Core i7's newer architecture and more efficient process node close much of the gap.

Power and platform targets diverge sharply. The Core i7-2715QE is a mobile part with a 45 W TDP, while the Xeon W3550 is a server or workstation chip with a 130 W TDP. The Core i7 uses Intel BGA 1023, a soldered mobile socket, while the Xeon uses Intel Socket 1366, a desktop or workstation socket. The Xeon also supports DDR3 memory through a triple-channel memory bus, and it supports ECC memory. The Core i7-2715QE has dual-channel memory support and no ECC capability. The database does not list memory support for the Core i7, but its memory bus is dual-channel. The Xeon's memory support is listed as DDR3.

Integrated graphics are another differentiator. The Core i7-2715QE includes Intel HD 3000 graphics; the Xeon W3550 has no integrated graphics at all. The Xeon lists PCIe Gen 2 support, while the database does not record a PCIe specification for the Core i7. The Core i7 is designated as a mobile part, and the Xeon as a server or workstation part. Both are end-of-life products. The Xeon was released on August 9, 2009, and the Core i7 on January 3, 2011. Neither has a recorded launch MSRP in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon W3550 wins every recorded benchmark, but the margins are modest. Its strongest advantage appears in multicore tests, where it leads by 1.5% in both R20 and R23 multicore. Single-core tests show the same 1.5% edge in R23 single-core, and a slightly smaller 1.2% lead in R20 single-core. The Xeon's higher base and boost clocks are the likely contributors to its consistent lead.

The Core i7-2715QE does not win any of the five head-to-head tests. However, its strengths lie outside raw Cinebench scores. It has a much lower TDP at 45 W versus 130 W, making it suitable for compact or mobile systems. It has integrated graphics, so it can run without a discrete GPU. Its 32 nm process node and 1,160 million transistors reflect a newer design, and its dual-channel memory bus is simpler for small form factor boards. The Xeon, by contrast, requires a discrete GPU and a platform with triple-channel memory and ECC support, which points toward workstation use.

For multi-threaded rendering work, the Xeon's 8 MB L3 cache and higher clocks give it a measurable edge, though the delta is small. For single-threaded tasks, the Xeon again leads, but only by a few points. The Core i7's advantage is not in benchmark scores; it is in platform flexibility, power draw, and the presence of integrated graphics. If the workload is purely CPU-bound rendering, the Xeon is the faster part. If the system needs to be low-power, compact, or GPU-integrated, the Core i7 is the more practical choice.

The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Xeon W3550 as the faster CPU in every measured Cinebench test. It wins all five head-to-head matchups with margins between 1.2% and 1.5%, and its average benchmark score of 956 is ahead of the Core i7-2715QE's 942. Its 3.07 GHz base clock, 3.33 GHz boost clock, and 8 MB L3 cache give it a structural performance advantage that shows up consistently across workloads.

That said, the Core i7-2715QE is not far behind. A 1.5% gap in multicore and single-core tests is small enough that other platform factors matter more. The Core i7 has a 45 W TDP, integrated graphics, and a 32 nm process node. The Xeon has a 130 W TDP, no integrated graphics, and a 45 nm node. For a builder prioritizing raw CPU throughput in a workstation or server context, the Xeon W3550 is the correct pick. For a builder prioritizing power efficiency, integrated graphics, or a mobile platform, the Core i7-2715QE is the better fit, even though it loses every benchmark.

The nearest rival data confirms that neither chip is a standout. The Core i7-2715QE sits at the 25th percentile of all CPUs, and the Xeon at the 26th. Both trade places with low-end and mid-range parts from the same era. The Xeon's edge is real but narrow, and it comes with a much higher power draw and a more demanding platform. The verdict from the database is straightforward: the Xeon is the faster processor, but the Core i7 is the more efficient and flexible one.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU wins the most benchmarks?

A: The Intel Xeon W3550 wins all five head-to-head Cinebench tests. The Core i7-2715QE does not win any of the recorded comparisons.

Q: How big is the performance gap between the two?

A: The Xeon leads by 1.2% to 1.5% across all tests. In R20 single-core the gap is 1.2%, and in R20 multicore, R23 multicore, and R23 single-core it is 1.5%. In R15 multicore it is 1.4%.

Q: Which CPU has the higher clock speed?

A: The Xeon W3550 has a 3.07 GHz base clock and a 3.33 GHz boost clock. The Core i7-2715QE has a 2.10 GHz base clock and a 3.00 GHz boost clock.

Q: Does either CPU have integrated graphics?

A: The Core i7-2715QE includes Intel HD 3000 integrated graphics. The Xeon W3550 has no integrated graphics.

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: The Xeon W3550 supports ECC memory. The Core i7-2715QE does not.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for these CPUs?

A: The Core i7-2715QE has a 45 W TDP. The Xeon W3550 has a 130 W TDP.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i7-2715QE | Intel Xeon W3550 |

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

| Base clock | 2.10 GHz | 3.07 GHz |

| Boost clock | 3.00 GHz | 3.33 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 130 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1023 | Intel Socket 1366 |

| Architecture | Sandy Bridge | Nehalem |

| Codename | Sandy Bridge | Bloomfield |

| Process node | 32 nm | 45 nm |

| Transistors | 1,160 million | 731 million |

| Die size | 216 mm² | 263 mm² |

| L3 cache | 6 MB (shared) | 8 MB (shared) |

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

| ECC memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Not listed | Gen 2 |

| Integrated graphics | Intel HD 3000 | None |

| Market segment | Mobile | Server/Workstation |

| Release date | January 3, 2011 | August 9, 2009 |

| Part number | SR076 | SLBEY |