CPU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear, though narrow, victory for the Intel Xeon E5540 across every single test in the comparison suite. The E5540 wins all five head-to-head matchups, but the margins are consistently slim, ranging from 1.8% to 2.2%. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the E5540 scores 240 against the X5482's 235, a 2.1% advantage. Moving to Cinebench R20 multi-core, the gap closes slightly to 1.8%, with scores of 1001 and 983 respectively. The single-core tests tell a similar story: the E5540 leads 141 to 138 in R20 single-core (a 2.2% edge) and 336 to 330 in R23 single-core (a 1.8% edge). The R23 multi-core test repeats the 1.8% delta, with the E5540 posting 2384 against the X5482's 2341.

What is notable is the consistency of the performance gap. Across different Cinebench versions, which have varying workloads and scaling characteristics, the E5540 maintains a nearly uniform lead. This suggests the advantage is architectural and systemic rather than workload-specific. In absolute terms, the E5540's average benchmark score of 820 places it just above the X5482's 805. The percentile ranking for both processors is identical at 22, indicating that despite the E5540's slight edge, both CPUs occupy the same performance tier relative to the entire CPU market. The E5540's nearest rivals include the AMD PRO A10-8750B (average score 821, delta of -0.1%) and the Intel Core i5-L16G7 (816, +0.5%), while the X5482 sits alongside the AMD Ryzen 3 2200U (805, 0% delta) and the AMD Athlon X4 850 (806, -0.1%). The data shows that while the E5540 is the winner here, neither chip is dominant; both are clustered with low-power mobile parts and older desktop processors in overall capability.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental architectural split between these two Xeons is substantial. The E5540 is built on the Nehalem architecture (codename Gainestown), while the X5482 uses the older Core 2 architecture (codename Harpertown). Both are manufactured on Intel's 45 nm process node, but the similarities end there. The E5540 packs 731 million transistors into a 263 mm² die, whereas the X5482 uses a dual-die design with 820 million total transistors spread across two 107 mm² dies. This dual-die approach for the X5482 is a hallmark of the Core 2 generation's multi-chip module strategy.

Core and thread counts differ significantly. The E5540 offers 4 cores with 8 threads via Hyper-Threading, while the X5482 provides 4 cores and 4 threads without simultaneous multithreading. This is a critical distinction: in threaded workloads, the E5540 can process twice as many threads, which helps explain its consistent benchmark lead despite the X5482's higher base clock. The E5540 has a base clock of 2.53 GHz with a boost clock of 2.80 GHz, while the X5482 runs at a fixed 3.20 GHz with no boost capability. Clock-for-clock, the X5482 is faster, but the E5540's architectural efficiency and threading capability compensate.

Cache hierarchies are also divergent. The E5540 features a three-level cache structure: 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and a shared 8 MB L3 cache. The X5482 has a simpler two-level design with 64 KB L1 per core and 6 MB of L2 per die. Notably, the X5482 has no L3 cache at all, relying entirely on its larger L2 slices. Memory support further separates the two: the E5540 uses triple-channel DDR3 with a memory bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s, while the X5482 supports DDR2 or DDR3 depending on the motherboard, using a dual-channel memory bus with no bandwidth figure provided in the data. The E5540 also uses the newer Intel Socket 1366, while the X5482 uses the older Intel Socket 771. Both support ECC memory and PCIe Gen 2, and neither has integrated graphics.

Where Each One Wins

The E5540 wins in every benchmark category measured, but the real-world implications extend beyond raw scores. The E5540's 8 threads make it the superior choice for heavily threaded server workloads such as database transactions, virtualization hosts, or multi-VM consolidation. The 1.8–2.1% performance lead in multi-core Cinebench tests, while modest, is consistent enough to matter in long-running batch jobs or sustained server loads. The E5540 also wins on power efficiency, with a TDP of 80 watts against the X5482's 150 watts. This near-50% reduction in thermal design power means lower operating costs, simpler cooling requirements, and better density in rack-mounted servers. The E5540's triple-channel memory architecture with 25.6 GB/s of bandwidth gives it a memory throughput advantage that is not directly reflected in the Cinebench scores but would show up in memory-bound workloads like in-memory databases or high-performance computing simulations.

The X5482 is not without its merits, despite losing every benchmark. Its 3.20 GHz base clock is significantly higher than the E5540's 2.53 GHz, which means that in lightly threaded or single-threaded legacy applications that cannot utilize more than one or two cores, the X5482 may feel more responsive. For workloads that are purely clock-speed bound and cannot use additional threads, the X5482's raw frequency could translate to better real-world performance than the Cinebench single-core scores suggest, though the data shows the E5540 still leads in single-core tests by 1.8–2.2%. The X5482's dual-die design with 6 MB L2 per die could also provide lower latency for certain access patterns that fit within the L2 cache, avoiding the need to go to main memory. In environments where legacy software compatibility with the Socket 771 platform is a requirement, the X5482 remains a viable option. However, for any modern mixed workload, the E5540's threading, cache hierarchy, and memory bandwidth make it the better all-rounder.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has a higher base clock speed?

A: The Intel Xeon X5482 has a base clock of 3.20 GHz, while the Intel Xeon E5540 runs at 2.53 GHz. The X5482 has no boost clock, whereas the E5540 can boost up to 2.80 GHz.

Q: How do the two CPUs compare in multi-threaded performance?

A: The E5540 wins all multi-core benchmarks. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the E5540 scores 2384 against the X5482's 2341, a 1.8% advantage. The E5540 also has 8 threads to the X5482's 4 threads, enabling better parallel processing.

Q: What are the cache differences between the two?

A: The E5540 has a three-level cache: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3. The X5482 has 64 KB L1 per core and 6 MB L2 per die, with no L3 cache at all.

Q: Which processor is more power-efficient?

A: The E5540 has a TDP of 80 watts, while the X5482 has a TDP of 150 watts. The E5540 consumes significantly less power, which is critical for server deployments.

Q: Do both CPUs support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon E5540 and the Intel Xeon X5482 support ECC memory. However, the E5540 uses triple-channel DDR3 with 25.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the X5482 uses dual-channel DDR2 or DDR3 depending on the motherboard.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each CPU?

A: The E5540 has an average benchmark score of 820, while the X5482 has an average score of 805. Both rank at the 22nd percentile among all CPUs.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon E5540 | Intel Xeon X5482 |

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

| Architecture | Nehalem | Core 2 |

| Codename | Gainestown | Harpertown |

| Threads | 8 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 2.53 GHz | 3.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 2.80 GHz | None |

| TDP | 80 W | 150 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1366 | Intel Socket 771 |

| Transistors | 731 million | 820 million |

| Die Size | 263 mm² | 2x 107 mm² |

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

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | None |

| Memory Support | DDR3 | DDR2, DDR3 (depends on motherboard) |

| Memory Bus | Triple-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | Not specified |

| Release Date | 2009-03-29 | 2007-11-10 |

| Launch MSRP | $774 | $1279 |

| Part Number | SLBF6 | SLANZSLBBG |