CPU Comparison

The Intel Core i7-875K and Intel Xeon X3470 are effectively identical silicon, but the benchmark data shows the Xeon consistently edges ahead in every recorded test. Despite sharing the same 4-core, 8-thread Lynnfield design, the Xeon X3470 wins all five head-to-head comparisons, with margins ranging from 4.2% to 4.7%. The Core i7-875K’s only distinction is its unlocked multiplier, which the data does not show translating into any benchmark advantage in these results.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Xeon X3470 dominates every measured workload, though the margins are consistent rather than dramatic. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Xeon scores 287 against the Core i7-875K’s 275, a 4.2% lead. That pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multicore, where the Xeon posts 1199 versus 1146, a 4.4% advantage. The gap widens slightly in single-core tests: the Xeon’s 169 in Cinebench R20 single-core beats the 875K’s 161 by 4.7%, and its 403 in Cinebench R23 single-core tops the 875K’s 385 by 4.5%.

The largest absolute difference appears in Cinebench R23 multicore, with the Xeon scoring 2857 versus 2729, a 128-point gap. That 4.5% lead is nearly identical to the other multicore results, suggesting the Xeon’s advantage is systematic rather than workload-specific. The average benchmark scores confirm the near-parity: the Xeon averages 983, while the Core i7-875K averages 984, a difference of 0.1% that flips in the i7’s favor when rounded.

The nearest-rival data places both chips in the same performance tier. The Core i7-875K’s nearest rival is the Intel Core i3-4130T at an identical 984 average score, with the Xeon X3470 just behind at 983 (0.1% delta). The Xeon’s nearest rival is the Core i3-4370T at 983, with the i7-875K at 984 showing a -0.1% delta. Both chips also trail the Intel Xeon W5590 by 0.2% to 0.3%, reinforcing that these are closely matched mid-tier parts from the same era.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i7-875K averages 984, while the Intel Xeon X3470 averages 983. The 0.1% difference is statistically negligible, placing them at near-parity overall.

Q: Does the Xeon X3470 win any benchmark by more than 5%?

A: No. Its largest margin is 4.7% in Cinebench R20 single-core (169 vs 161). All other wins fall between 4.2% and 4.5%.

Q: Are the core and thread counts identical between the two?

A: Yes. Both have 4 cores and 8 threads, with the same 2.93 GHz base clock and 3.60 GHz boost clock.

Q: What is the difference in launch MSRP?

A: The Core i7-875K had a launch MSRP of $353, while the Xeon X3470 launched at $589.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Only the Xeon X3470 supports ECC memory. The Core i7-875K does not.

Q: How do these chips compare to the Intel Xeon W5590?

A: The Xeon W5590 averages 986, which is 0.2% higher than the Core i7-875K’s 984 and 0.3% higher than the Xeon X3470’s 983.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on the same Nehalem architecture with the Lynnfield codename, manufactured on Intel’s 45 nm process. They share identical transistor counts of 774 million and the same die size of 296 mm². The cache hierarchy is identical: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3. Memory support matches as well, with dual-channel DDR3 and 21.3 GB/s bandwidth.

The architectural distinction is minimal. The Core i7-875K is classified under the Core i7 (Lynnfield) generation, while the Xeon X3470 falls under the Xeon (Lynnfield) generation. This naming difference reflects their intended market segments rather than silicon changes. The production status is identical, both are end-of-life parts. The only meaningful architectural divergence is ECC memory support, which the Xeon includes and the Core i7 lacks, a feature driven by the Xeon’s server/workstation positioning.

Specification Differences

The specifications that differ between the two processors are few, given their shared foundation. The market segment is the most significant split: the Core i7-875K targets Desktop, while the Xeon X3470 targets Server/Workstation. This aligns with their ECC memory capabilities, the Xeon supports ECC, the Core i7 does not.

The multiplier status also differs: the Core i7-875K has an unlocked multiplier, while the Xeon X3470’s multiplier is locked. This makes the i7 the overclocking candidate, though the benchmark data does not reflect any performance benefit from that feature in stock tests. Release dates differ, with the Core i7-875K launching on 2010-05-29 and the Xeon X3470 on 2009-09-07. Part numbers are distinct as well: SLBS2 for the i7 and SLBJH for the Xeon. The launch MSRP differs substantially, with the i7 at $353 and the Xeon at $589, though the Xeon’s higher price does not translate into higher benchmark scores in this dataset.

All other specifications match exactly: 4 cores, 8 threads, 2.93 GHz base clock, 3.60 GHz boost clock, 95 W TDP, Intel Socket 1156, 45 nm process, 774 million transistors, 296 mm² die size, identical cache hierarchy, dual-channel DDR3 memory support, 21.3 GB/s memory bandwidth, and PCIe Gen 2 with 16 lanes (CPU only). Neither processor includes integrated graphics.

The Verdict

The data points to the Xeon X3470 as the stronger performer in every benchmark recorded, despite the Core i7-875K’s higher average score by a single point. The Xeon’s 4.2% to 4.7% lead across all Cinebench tests is consistent and repeatable, covering both single-core and multicore workloads. If raw benchmark performance is the sole criterion, the Xeon X3470 is the clear choice from these results.

However, the Core i7-875K offers two advantages that the Xeon cannot match: an unlocked multiplier for overclocking and a substantially lower launch MSRP of $353 versus $589. The unlocked multiplier is particularly relevant for users who intend to push clock speeds beyond stock, though the data does not include any overclocked results. The Xeon’s ECC memory support makes it the appropriate pick for workstation or server reliability use cases, where memory error correction is a priority.

The average scores tell a more nuanced story. The Core i7-875K’s 984 average edges the Xeon’s 983, and both sit within 0.1% of the Intel Core i3-4130T and Core i3-4370T. This suggests that in aggregate, the two processors are functionally equivalent for typical workloads, with the Xeon’s consistent Cinebench advantage being offset by the i7’s performance in other unlisted test categories.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon X3470 wins every benchmark category where both processors have recorded scores: Cinebench R15 multicore, R20 multicore, R20 single-core, R23 multicore, and R23 single-core. This sweep is notable for its uniformity, the margins range narrowly from 4.2% to 4.7%, indicating a stable performance edge that does not favor any particular workload type. Users running Cinebench-style rendering or compute tasks should expect the Xeon to finish roughly 4% to 5% faster in all cases.

The Core i7-875K wins in the aggregate average benchmark score, 984 versus 983, though this is a razor-thin margin. It also holds two categorical advantages not measured by the benchmark suite: an unlocked multiplier for overclocking and a lower launch MSRP. For users who prioritize the ability to adjust multipliers or who are constrained by initial cost, the i7-875K is the more flexible option. The Xeon’s ECC memory support gives it the edge in reliability-sensitive environments, while the i7’s desktop market segment positioning suggests it as the more straightforward consumer choice.

In practice, the decision hinges on priorities beyond the benchmark results. The Xeon X3470 is the faster chip in every measured test, but the Core i7-875K offers overclocking headroom and a lower launch price. For stock-performance comparisons, the Xeon wins outright. For users who intend to overclock, the i7’s unlocked multiplier provides a path that the Xeon cannot offer, though the data does not quantify the potential gains.