Intel Core i7-950 vs Intel Xeon X5560 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a consistent, though narrow, advantage for the Intel Core i7-950 across every recorded Cinebench test. The i7-950 wins all five benchmark comparisons, with the Xeon X5560 finishing as the runner-up in each instance. The largest margin comes in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the i7-950 scores 280 against the Xeon's 276, a 1.4% lead. The single-core gap is nearly identical in relative terms: in Cinebench R20 single-core, the i7-950 posts 164 versus 162, a 1.2% advantage.

The multi-core results follow the same pattern. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the i7-950 scores 1167 against 1154, a 1.1% lead. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 2780 for the i7-950 and 2749 for the Xeon, again a 1.1% difference. The smallest margin appears in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the i7-950's 392 edges out the Xeon's 388 by exactly 1%. None of these deltas are large; the data indicates a processor that is systematically faster, but only by a slim margin, across both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads.

Looking at the average benchmark scores, the picture remains consistent. The i7-950 averages 957 points, while the Xeon X5560 averages 946. That is an 11-point gap, or roughly 1.2%. The percentile rankings reflect this near-parity: the i7-950 sits at the 26th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the Xeon sits at the 25th. In practical terms, these two processors occupy essentially the same performance tier, with the i7-950 holding a slight edge in every measured scenario.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on Intel's Nehalem architecture and manufactured on the same 45 nm process node. They share the same transistor count of 731 million and the same die size of 263 mm². Both use the Intel Socket 1366 platform and support DDR3 memory via a triple-channel memory bus. Neither has integrated graphics, and both support PCIe Gen 2. The cache hierarchy is identical: 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache.

The core and thread configuration is also the same. Both processors offer 4 cores and 8 threads, which means both can handle eight concurrent threads via Hyper-Threading. The crucial difference lies in clock speeds. The i7-950 runs at a 3.07 GHz base clock and boosts to 3.33 GHz. The Xeon X5560 runs at a 2.80 GHz base clock and boosts to 3.20 GHz. This clock advantage for the i7-950 explains its consistent, if modest, benchmark wins.

The data also reveals a few structural differences beyond clock speed. The i7-950 belongs to the Bloomfield codename family, while the Xeon uses the Gainestown codename. The market segments differ: the i7-950 is a desktop part, while the Xeon X5560 is a server or workstation part. The Xeon supports ECC memory, while the i7-950 does not. The power envelope differs significantly: the i7-950 has a TDP of 130 watts, whereas the Xeon X5560 draws only 95 watts. This 35-watt difference is notable, as it indicates the Xeon achieves nearly the same performance at a substantially lower thermal and power requirement.

Release timing also differs. The Xeon X5560 was released earlier, on 2009-03-29, while the i7-950 followed on 2009-06-01. Both are designated as end-of-life products. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking headroom is limited to base clock adjustments on the motherboard. The part numbers are SLBEN for the i7-950 and SLBF4 for the Xeon X5560.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data shows the i7-950 winning every recorded test, but the magnitude of those wins tells the real story. The i7-950 is the faster processor in absolute terms, with a 1.4% lead in Cinebench R15 multi-core and a 1.2% lead in Cinebench R20 single-core. For users who prioritize raw compute performance in Cinebench-style workloads, the i7-950 is the clear choice. Its higher base clock of 3.07 GHz versus 2.80 GHz, and its higher boost clock of 3.33 GHz versus 3.20 GHz, give it a consistent edge in both single-threaded and multi-threaded rendering tasks.

The Xeon X5560, however, wins in efficiency and platform suitability. Its 95-watt TDP is substantially lower than the i7-950's 130-watt TDP. For a server or workstation environment where multiple sockets run continuously, that power difference can be significant. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, which is a requirement for many server workloads that demand error correction in memory. The i7-950 lacks ECC support entirely, which limits its appeal in mission-critical applications.

In terms of raw benchmark scores, the Xeon is never ahead. But the data shows the two are effectively peers in performance, with the Xeon trailing by only 1.0% to 1.4% depending on the test. The Xeon's advantage is not in speed but in operational characteristics: lower power draw and ECC memory support. For a workstation that runs 24/7 or a server that handles sensitive data, the Xeon's feature set may outweigh the small performance deficit. For a desktop user who wants the last bit of speed from a legacy Socket 1366 platform, the i7-950 is the stronger option.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core i7-950 is faster in all recorded multi-core tests. It scores 280 versus 276 in Cinebench R15, 1167 versus 1154 in Cinebench R20, and 2780 versus 2749 in Cinebench R23. The margins range from 1.1% to 1.4%.

Q: How do the single-core scores compare?

A: The i7-950 also leads in single-core tests. It scores 164 versus 162 in Cinebench R20 single-core and 392 versus 388 in Cinebench R23 single-core, representing a 1.2% and 1.0% advantage, respectively.

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

A: Yes, both have 4 cores and 8 threads. They also share the same cache layout: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3.

Q: What are the key architectural differences?

A: The i7-950 is a Bloomfield desktop part with a 3.07 GHz base clock and 3.33 GHz boost clock, while the Xeon X5560 is a Gainestown server part with a 2.80 GHz base clock and 3.20 GHz boost clock. The Xeon supports ECC memory and has a 95-watt TDP, while the i7-950 does not support ECC and has a 130-watt TDP.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The i7-950 has an average benchmark score of 957, compared to 946 for the Xeon X5560. The i7-950 also ranks at the 26th percentile of all CPUs, one point above the Xeon's 25th percentile.

Q: Are both processors on the same socket?

A: Yes, both use Intel Socket 1366. They also share the same 45 nm process node, 731 million transistors, and 263 mm² die size.

The Verdict

The data presents a straightforward choice for raw performance: the Intel Core i7-950 wins every benchmark in the comparison. It leads by 1.4% in Cinebench R15 multi-core, 1.1% in Cinebench R20 multi-core, 1.2% in Cinebench R20 single-core, 1.1% in Cinebench R23 multi-core, and 1.0% in Cinebench R23 single-core. Its higher clock speeds, 3.07 GHz base and 3.33 GHz boost, drive these results. For a desktop user on Socket 1366 who wants maximum compute throughput, the i7-950 is the better part.

However, the Xeon X5560 is not without its merits. It delivers nearly identical performance, within 1.4% at worst, while consuming 35 watts less power. Its 95-watt TDP versus 130 watts for the i7-950 makes it the more efficient choice for dense server deployments or workstations where thermal load matters. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, a critical feature for data integrity in server environments. The i7-950's lack of ECC support is a disqualifier for those use cases.

The database shows the two processors as near-performance peers, with the i7-950 holding a slim but consistent edge. The decision comes down to platform requirements. If the workload demands ECC memory or lower power consumption, the Xeon X5560 is the appropriate selection despite its slightly lower scores. If the goal is maximum benchmark performance on a desktop platform, the i7-950 wins outright. The recorded data does not show any scenario where the Xeon outperforms the i7-950, but it does show a scenario where the Xeon's feature set justifies its selection: power-sensitive or ECC-requiring environments. For everyone else, the i7-950 is the faster processor.