Intel Core i7-5550U vs Intel Xeon X3440 Comparison

The benchmark data presents a striking picture: the Intel Xeon X3440 and Intel Core i7-5550U are virtually inseparable in raw compute performance, despite belonging to different eras and market segments. The Xeon, a 2009 server/workstation part, holds a razor-thin lead across every single benchmark test, yet the 2015 mobile Core i7 matches it almost exactly. This is a classic case where architectural efficiency and core count produce a statistical dead heat.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive outcome is the near-perfect parity across all five Cinebench tests. The Xeon X3440 wins every head-to-head matchup, but the margins are negligible. In the Cinebench R15 multicore test, both processors score exactly 238 points, resulting in a 0% delta and a nominal win for the Xeon. This is not a victory; it is a tie.

Moving to Cinebench R20 multicore, the Xeon scores 994 against the i7-5550U’s 992, a delta of just 0.2%. The single-core R20 test shows a similar pattern: 140 for the Xeon versus 139 for the i7-5550U, a 0.7% lead. The Cinebench R23 results continue the trend, with the Xeon taking multicore at 2368 versus 2363 (0.2% delta) and single-core at 334 versus 333 (0.3% delta). The Xeon’s total win count is 5, while the i7-5550U has 0 wins, but these numbers are misleading without context.

The average benchmark scores confirm the head-to-head data. The Xeon X3440 averages 815, while the i7-5550U averages 813. Their nearest rivals list each other with a delta of only 0.2% (from the Xeon’s perspective) and -0.2% (from the i7’s perspective). Both processors sit at the 22nd percentile among all CPUs, meaning they are statistically identical in overall performance. The data shows that in every measurable compute task, these two chips are interchangeable.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon X3440 wins on raw multi-threaded throughput, albeit by a hair. Its 4 cores and 8 threads provide the foundation for its consistent, if marginal, leads in the multicore tests. In Cinebench R20 multicore, the 994 score edges out the i7 by 2 points. This pattern repeats in R23 multicore, where the Xeon’s 2368 surpasses 2363. For workloads that scale perfectly across cores, the Xeon holds a nominal advantage.

The i7-5550U wins on efficiency and platform capability. While it loses the compute benchmarks, its 15W TDP is dramatically lower than the Xeon’s 95W. The i7 also integrates Intel HD 6000 graphics, a feature entirely absent from the Xeon. The i7’s memory bandwidth is higher at 29.9 GB/s versus the Xeon’s 21.3 GB/s. For a mobile or compact system, the i7 offers a complete, low-power package. The i7’s single-core performance is also remarkably close, trailing by only 0.7% in R20 single-core despite its lower base clock.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two is vast. The Xeon X3440 uses the Nehalem architecture (codenamed Lynnfield) on a 45 nm process node, packing 774 million transistors on a 296 mm² die. It supports ECC memory and uses an Intel Socket 1156. The i7-5550U, in contrast, is built on the Broadwell architecture (Broadwell-U) using a 14 nm process. It crams 1,900 million transistors onto a much smaller 133 mm² die. This process shrink is the primary reason the i7 achieves comparable performance at a fraction of the power.

The core configurations differ fundamentally. The Xeon offers 4 cores and 8 threads, while the i7 offers 2 cores and 4 threads. The Xeon compensates for its older architecture with more physical cores. The cache hierarchies also reflect their eras. Both share 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, but the Xeon has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, double the i7’s 4 MB. The i7 compensates with a higher boost clock of 3.00 GHz versus the Xeon’s 2.93 GHz, and a much higher base clock of 2000.00 MHz (the pack lists this as 2000.00) versus 2.53 GHz.

Other key differences include PCIe lanes: the Xeon provides Gen 2 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the i7 provides Gen 2 with 12 lanes. The Xeon supports ECC memory; the i7 does not. The i7 includes integrated Intel HD 6000 graphics; the Xeon has none. Finally, the Xeon targets the Server/Workstation segment, while the i7 is a Mobile part. Both are end-of-life and have locked multipliers.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Xeon X3440 has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 815, compared to the Intel Core i7-5550U’s 813.

Q: In the Cinebench R15 multicore test, what is the score difference?

A: There is no difference. Both the Intel Xeon X3440 and the Intel Core i7-5550U score exactly 238 points, resulting in a 0% delta.

Q: What is the TDP of each processor?

A: The Intel Xeon X3440 has a TDP of 95W, while the Intel Core i7-5550U has a TDP of 15W.

Q: Does the Intel Core i7-5550U have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it features Intel HD 6000 integrated graphics. The Intel Xeon X3440 does not have any integrated graphics.

Q: What is the L3 cache size for each chip?

A: The Intel Xeon X3440 has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Core i7-5550U has 4 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The Intel Xeon X3440 has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Intel Core i7-5550U has 2 cores and 4 threads.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion: for pure compute performance, the Intel Xeon X3440 is the nominal winner, but the margin is so small as to be irrelevant. The Xeon wins all five benchmark comparisons, but with deltas ranging from 0% to 0.7%. Its 4-core, 8-thread configuration gives it a structural advantage in multi-threaded tasks, as seen in the consistent, if tiny, leads in Cinebench R20 and R23 multicore.

However, the Intel Core i7-5550U is the more compelling choice for most modern use cases. It matches the Xeon’s performance while offering a 15W TDP versus 95W, integrated graphics, and higher memory bandwidth. The i7’s 2-core, 4-thread setup is less robust for heavy multi-threading, but its 14 nm process allows it to achieve near-identical scores with far less power draw. The i7 also includes features the Xeon lacks, such as the integrated GPU.

From a pure server or workstation perspective, the Xeon’s ECC memory support and 16 PCIe Gen 2 lanes give it a functional edge in reliability-focused environments. But for a mobile or compact system, the i7-5550U is the obvious choice. The performance parity confirms process node advancements, but the i7’s feature set and efficiency make it the more versatile processor. Pick the Xeon only if you need ECC memory and have a compatible Socket 1156 platform. Otherwise, the i7-5550U delivers the same compute results with a fraction of the power.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon X3440 | Intel Core i7-5550U |

|:--- |:--- |:--- |

| Cores | 4 | 2 |

| Threads | 8 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 2.53 GHz | 2000.00 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2.93 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

| TDP | 95 W | 15 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1156 | Intel BGA 1168 |

| Architecture | Nehalem | Broadwell |

| Codename | Lynnfield | Broadwell-U |

| Process Node | 45 nm | 14 nm |

| Transistors | 774 million | 1,900 million |

| Die Size | 296 mm² | 133 mm² |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | 4 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 21.3 GB/s | 29.9 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 2, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 2, 12 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | None | Intel HD 6000 |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Mobile |

| Launch MSRP | $215 | $426 |