Intel Core i7-5550U vs Intel Xeon X5470 Comparison

The Intel Xeon X5470 and Intel Core i7-5550U represent two very different approaches to computing, separated by nearly seven years of silicon evolution. The Xeon X5470 is a high-power, server-oriented quad-core from the Core 2 era, while the i7-5550U is a low-power, mobile-focused dual-core from the Broadwell generation. The benchmark data shows a consistent, though narrow, advantage for the older Xeon across all recorded Cinebench tests, despite the i7’s significant architectural and process node advantages. This analysis will break down where each processor excels, how their architectures differ, and what the recorded scores mean for potential use cases.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the recorded head-to-head data, the Intel Xeon X5470 wins every single benchmark comparison. The database lists five wins for the Xeon and zero for the Core i7-5550U. This is a clean sweep, though the margin of victory is small in every test. The Xeon’s biggest advantage comes in the Cinebench R20 single-core test, where it leads by 3.6%. Its narrowest win is in Cinebench R15 multi-core, with a 2.9% lead.

The Core i7-5550U does not win any head-to-head benchmark. However, its performance is remarkably close given its drastically lower power envelope. The data shows that the i7 trails by only 2.9% to 3.6% across all tests, which suggests that while the Xeon holds the performance crown, the i7 is not far behind in raw throughput.

The performance profile is consistent across single-core and multi-core workloads. The Xeon X5470 leads in both categories, but the margins are so tight that the i7-5550U’s efficiency becomes a major counterpoint. The Xeon’s wins are real but modest, making the i7 a compelling alternative for scenarios where power consumption and heat output are more critical than peak benchmark scores.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is substantial. The Xeon X5470 is built on Intel’s Core 2 architecture, codenamed Harpertown, using a 45 nm process node. It integrates 820 million transistors across a dual-die design with a total die size of 2x 107 mm². In contrast, the Core i7-5550U uses the Broadwell architecture, specifically Broadwell-U, on a much more advanced 14 nm process. This newer node packs 1,900 million transistors into a single 133 mm² die.

The core configurations differ significantly. The Xeon has four physical cores and four threads, while the i7 has two physical cores but four threads thanks to Hyper-Threading. The Xeon’s base clock is 3.33 GHz with no boost clock, whereas the i7 has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 3.00 GHz. The Xeon compensates for its older architecture with a higher sustained clock speed.

Cache layouts also diverge. The Xeon offers 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 6 MB of L2 cache per die, with no L3 cache. The i7-5550U has the same 64 KB L1 per core, but its L2 is 256 KB per core, and it adds a 4 MB shared L3 cache. The i7’s larger per-core L2 and shared L3 are typical of a more modern design, even if the Xeon’s raw clocks are higher.

Memory support and platform features are another major differentiator. The Xeon supports DDR2 and DDR3 memory depending on the motherboard, runs dual-channel, and supports ECC memory. It uses PCIe Gen 2 and targets the server/workstation segment. The i7-5550U supports DDR3 only, also dual-channel, with a specified memory bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s. It lacks ECC support and includes integrated Intel HD 6000 graphics, a feature absent from the Xeon. The i7 is a mobile part on Intel BGA 1168, while the Xeon uses the larger Intel Socket 771.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded Cinebench results show a consistent pattern of narrow Xeon victories. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon X5470 scores 245 against the i7-5550U’s 238, a 2.9% lead. Moving to Cinebench R20 multi-core, the Xeon scores 1024 versus 992, widening the margin slightly to 3.2%.

The single-core results follow a similar trend. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the Xeon posts 144, while the i7 scores 139, giving the Xeon a 3.6% advantage. This is the largest delta in the entire comparison. In Cinebench R23, the multi-core test shows the Xeon at 2440 and the i7 at 2363, a 3.3% difference. The single-core R23 test shows the Xeon at 344 and the i7 at 333, again a 3.3% lead.

The average benchmark scores corroborate this picture. The Xeon X5470 has an average benchmark score of 839, while the i7-5550U sits at 813. This places the Xeon in the 22nd percentile of all CPUs, with the i7 also at the 22nd percentile. The Xeon’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-3380M (average score 838, delta 0.1%), the Intel Core i7-920 (average score 840, delta -0.1%), and the Intel Core i5-5200U (average score 838, delta 0.2%). The i7-5550U’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 (average score 813, delta 0%), the Intel Xeon X3440 (average score 815, delta -0.2%), and the AMD A10-6800K (average score 809, delta 0.5%).

These numbers indicate that neither chip is a performance outlier. Both sit near a cluster of similarly scoring processors from different eras. The Xeon’s victories are consistent but small, suggesting that the architectural efficiency of the i7 nearly compensates for its lower core count and clock speed.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Xeon X5470 has 4 cores and 4 threads, while the Intel Core i7-5550U has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: Does the Core i7-5550U support ECC memory?

A: No, the Core i7-5550U does not support ECC memory. The Xeon X5470 does support ECC memory.

Q: What is the performance difference in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Xeon X5470 scores 2440, while the Core i7-5550U scores 2363. The Xeon leads by 3.3%.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: Only the Intel Core i7-5550U has integrated graphics, specifically Intel HD 6000. The Xeon X5470 has no integrated graphics.

Q: What is the process node for each processor?

A: The Xeon X5470 uses a 45 nm process, while the Core i7-5550U uses a 14 nm process.

Q: In which benchmark does the Xeon have its largest lead?

A: The Xeon X5470 has its largest lead in Cinebench R20 single-core, where it scores 144 versus the i7-5550U’s 139, a 3.6% difference.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon X5470 | Intel Core i7-5550U |

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

| Cores | 4 | 2 |

| Threads | 4 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 3.33 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | None | 3.00 GHz |

| TDP | 120 W | 15 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 771 | Intel BGA 1168 |

| Architecture | Core 2 | Broadwell |

| Process Node | 45 nm | 14 nm |

| Transistors | 820 million | 1,900 million |

| Die Size | 2x 107 mm² | 133 mm² |

| L2 Cache | 6 MB (per die) | 256 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | None | 4 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR2, DDR3 | DDR3 |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| Integrated Graphics | None | Intel HD 6000 |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Mobile |

| Launch MSRP | $1386 | $426 |

The Verdict

The data points to a clear, albeit narrow, performance winner in the Intel Xeon X5470. It wins all five recorded head-to-head benchmarks, with leads ranging from 2.9% to 3.6%. Its higher base clock of 3.33 GHz and four physical cores give it a consistent edge in both single-core and multi-core Cinebench tests. For workloads that are heavily threaded and can utilize four full cores, the Xeon is the better choice based on the recorded scores.

However, the Core i7-5550U’s performance is remarkably close, trailing by only a few percentage points despite having half the physical cores, a much lower 2.00 GHz base clock, and a 15 W TDP compared to the Xeon’s 120 W. The i7’s newer 14 nm architecture, larger L3 cache, and integrated graphics make it a far more efficient and feature-complete package for mobile or low-power systems. The data suggests that for users prioritizing raw compute performance in a server or workstation context, the Xeon X5470 is the stronger option. For users who need a capable processor with integrated graphics, ECC is not required, and power efficiency is paramount, the Core i7-5550U offers nearly equivalent performance with drastically lower power consumption. The choice ultimately hinges on whether the 2.9% to 3.6% performance advantage of the Xeon justifies its much higher power draw and lack of modern features.