CPU Comparison

The Intel Xeon W3550 and Intel Xeon W3570 are two Nehalem-based workstation processors that, on paper, appear nearly identical. Both are 4-core, 8-thread parts built on the same 45 nm process, sharing the same 8 MB L3 cache and 130 W TDP. The data, however, reveals a fascinating story: despite the W3570’s higher clock speeds, the W3550 consistently edges out its sibling in every recorded benchmark, albeit by razor-thin margins. This analysis dissects the benchmark results, architectural similarities, and specification differences to clarify which processor holds the advantage in practice.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark data shows a clean sweep for the Intel Xeon W3550, though the margins are almost imperceptibly small. In the Cinebench R15 multi-core test, both processors score identically at 279 points, with the delta percentage recorded as 0%. This is the only test where the two CPUs are perfectly tied. The W3550 is declared the winner in this category, but the score difference is nonexistent, making it a nominal victory at best.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the multi-core test yields a score of 1166 for the W3550 versus 1165 for the W3570. This 1-point difference translates to a deltaPct of 0.1%, favoring the W3550. The single-core R20 test shows both processors at exactly 164 points, another perfect tie. The same pattern holds in Cinebench R23: the multi-core test gives the W3550 a score of 2778 against the W3570’s 2776, a 0.1% edge, while the single-core test again results in a dead heat at 392 points for both.

In total, the W3550 wins 5 head-to-head comparisons, while the W3570 wins none. However, the largest deltaPct in any single test is just 0.1%, which is within the margin of measurement error for most benchmarking tools. The average benchmark scores reflect this: the W3550 posts an average of 956, while the W3570 sits at 955. The W3550’s percentile ranking is 26 versus the W3570’s 25, a difference of one percentage point against all CPUs tracked in the database.

The nearest rival data places both chips in the same performance tier. The W3550 is tied with the AMD Athlon X4 870K at an average score of 956, and it trails the Intel Core i7-950 by just 0.1% (957 average score). The W3570, meanwhile, is tied with the Intel Celeron N5105 at 955 and sits 0.2% behind the Core i7-950. The two Xeons are effectively interchangeable in raw throughput, with the W3550’s consistent, if marginal, superiority suggesting slightly better binning or thermal behavior.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher base clock speed?

A: The Intel Xeon W3570 has a base clock of 3.20 GHz, while the Intel Xeon W3550 runs at 3.07 GHz. The W3570 also has a higher boost clock at 3.47 GHz versus the W3550’s 3.33 GHz.

Q: Do the two processors differ in core count or cache size?

A: No. Both the W3550 and W3570 feature 4 cores, 8 threads, 64 KB L1 cache per core, 256 KB L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. Their architectural cache layouts are identical.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two CPUs?

A: The W3550 has an average benchmark score of 956, while the W3570 scores 955. This represents a 0.1% difference, with the W3550 holding the edge.

Q: In which benchmark test does the W3570 outperform the W3550?

A: According to the head-to-head data, the W3570 does not win any of the five Cinebench tests. The W3550 wins all five, although four of those wins are ties in raw score or margins of 0.1%.

Q: Are these processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No. Both the Intel Xeon W3550 and the Intel Xeon W3570 have the multiplier unlocked status set to false. They are fixed-clock server/workstation parts.

Q: How does the W3550 compare to the Intel Core i7-950?

A: The W3550 has an average score of 956, which is 0.1% lower than the Core i7-950’s 957. The W3570 is 0.2% behind the Core i7-950.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on the same Nehalem architecture, specifically the Bloomfield codename, and are fabricated on Intel’s 45 nm process node. The transistor count is identical at 731 million, and the die size is the same 263 mm². This means the fundamental compute engine, the execution units, the memory controller, and the cache hierarchy, is architecturally indistinguishable between the two chips.

The only meaningful architectural difference lies in their clock frequency profiles. The W3570 operates at a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 3.47 GHz, while the W3550 runs at 3.07 GHz base and 3.33 GHz boost. These are not different architectures but rather different binning of the same silicon. The higher clocks on the W3570 theoretically allow it to complete more instructions per unit time, yet the benchmark data does not reflect this advantage, suggesting that the W3550 may have a more efficient power delivery or better thermal characteristics under load.

Both processors support DDR3 memory with a triple-channel memory bus and have ECC memory support enabled, a critical feature for server and workstation stability. They also both utilize PCIe Gen 2. The lack of integrated graphics on both chips is notable, as they rely on discrete GPUs for any display output. The production status for both is end-of-life, and their release dates differ by roughly four months, with the W3570 launching earlier in March 2009 and the W3550 following in August 2009.

Specification Differences

The specification tables reveal only a handful of fields where the two processors differ. The base clock is the most prominent: the W3570 is 0.13 GHz faster at 3.20 GHz versus the W3550’s 3.07 GHz. Similarly, the boost clock shows the W3570 reaching 3.47 GHz, which is 0.14 GHz higher than the W3550’s 3.33 GHz.

The part numbers differ, with the W3550 using the SLBEY designation and the W3570 using SLBES. The release dates also diverge: the W3570 launched on March 29, 2009, while the W3550 launched on August 8, 2009. Interestingly, despite the W3570’s higher clocks, the average benchmark score is lower (955 vs. 956), and the percentile ranking is lower as well (25th vs. 26th percentile).

All other specification fields are identical: 4 cores, 8 threads, 130 W TDP, Intel Socket 1366, 45 nm process, 731 million transistors, 263 mm² die size, the same cache layout, DDR3 memory support with triple-channel bus, ECC memory support, PCIe Gen 2, no integrated graphics, and a locked multiplier. The market segment is the same for both, Server/Workstation.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the benchmark data, the Intel Xeon W3550 is the winner in almost every measurable category. It takes all five head-to-head benchmark victories, even if four of those are ties or 0.1% margins. Its average benchmark score is 1 point higher, and its percentile ranking is one point better. The W3550’s consistent, if marginal, performance edge suggests that it is the safer choice for workloads that rely on sustained multi-core throughput, such as rendering, simulation, or data processing tasks.

The Intel Xeon W3570, however, wins in the specification sheet. Its higher base and boost clocks make it the nominal choice for single-threaded applications where clock speed is the primary driver. In theory, tasks like legacy single-threaded code or lightly threaded databases should favor the W3570’s 3.47 GHz boost clock. Yet the Cinebench R20 and R23 single-core tests show a perfect tie at 164 and 392 points respectively, indicating that the clock advantage does not translate into real-world wins.

For users prioritizing raw frequency and the perception of speed, the W3570 has the edge on paper. For users who rely on average benchmark scores and multi-core performance, the W3550 is the better pick. Given that both processors are end-of-life and occupy the same socket and power envelope, the choice comes down to whether a 0.13 GHz clock bump matters more than a 0.1% benchmark advantage. The data suggests that the W3550’s slightly better real-world results make it the more reliable processor, while the W3570 remains a valid alternative for those who value clock speed above all else.