Intel Xeon W3550 vs Intel Xeon X5560 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a consistent, though narrow, advantage for the Intel Xeon W3550 across every recorded test. Out of five head-to-head comparisons, the W3550 wins all five, with the largest margin being a 1.2% lead in the Cinebench R20 single-core test. The smallest margin is a 1% advantage in both Cinebench R20 multi-core and Cinebench R23 single-core.

In multi-core workloads, the W3550 scores 279 in Cinebench R15 multi-core versus 276 for the Xeon X5560, a 1.1% delta. That pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the W3550 posts 1166 against 1154, again a 1% delta. The Cinebench R23 multi-core test shows 2778 for the W3550 and 2749 for the X5560, matching the 1.1% delta seen in R15. These results indicate that the W3550 holds a small but repeatable lead in heavily threaded rendering tasks, likely a direct consequence of its higher operating frequencies.

Single-core performance follows the same trajectory. The W3550 records 164 in Cinebench R20 single-core, while the X5560 manages 162, giving the W3550 a 1.2% edge, the largest single-test gap in the dataset. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the W3550 scores 392 versus 388, a 1% delta. While these margins are modest, they are uniform across all tests, which suggests the W3550's clock advantage translates into real, measurable performance gains in both lightly threaded and fully threaded scenarios.

The average benchmark score tells a similar story. The W3550 has an average benchmark score of 956, while the X5560 sits at 946. That 10-point gap places the W3550 in the 26th percentile of all CPUs, one percentile point above the X5560's 25th percentile. In the database's nearest rival comparisons, the W3550's average score ties the AMD Athlon X4 870K at 956, is 0.1% ahead of the Intel Celeron N5105 and the Intel Xeon W3570, and trails the Intel Core i7-950 by 0.1%. The X5560's average score of 946 ties the Intel Pentium Gold G5400T and the AMD Phenom II X6 1045T, while trailing the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U by 0.1% and leading the Intel Core i3-1110G4 by 0.1%. These nearest rival positions reinforce that both chips occupy nearly identical performance tiers, with the W3550 holding a slight edge in every direct comparison.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on Intel's Nehalem architecture, but they come from different codenames within that family. The W3550 uses the Bloomfield codename, while the X5560 uses Gainestown. Both are manufactured on Intel's 45 nm process node at Intel's own foundry, with identical transistor counts of 731 million and identical die sizes of 263 mm². The shared architecture means both chips feature 4 cores and 8 threads, with the same cache hierarchy: 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache.

The key architectural difference lies in clock behavior. The W3550 has a base clock of 3.07 GHz and a boost clock of 3.33 GHz. The X5560 has a base clock of 2.80 GHz and a boost clock of 3.20 GHz. That 0.27 GHz base clock advantage and 0.13 GHz boost clock advantage for the W3550 explains the consistent performance deltas observed in the benchmarks. The X5560 compensates with a significantly lower thermal design power: 95 watts versus 130 watts for the W3550. This makes the X5560 the more power-efficient option on paper, which matters in dense server deployments where thermal envelopes are constrained.

Both processors use the same Intel Socket 1366, support DDR3 memory through a triple-channel memory bus, and include ECC memory support. Both also implement PCIe Gen 2. Neither chip has integrated graphics, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The production status for both is end-of-life. The release dates differ: the X5560 was released on 2009-03-29, while the W3550 followed on 2009-08-08. The part numbers also differ, with the W3550 carrying SLBEY and the X5560 carrying SLBF4. Neither processor has a recorded launch MSRP in the database.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Xeon W3550 wins every multi-core benchmark in the head-to-head comparison. It scores 279 versus 276 in Cinebench R15 multi-core, 1166 versus 1154 in Cinebench R20 multi-core, and 2778 versus 2749 in Cinebench R23 multi-core. The deltas range from 1% to 1.1%.

Q: How do the two chips compare in single-core performance?

A: The W3550 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 1.2% and 1% advantages, respectively.

Q: What is the main reason for the W3550's performance advantage?

A: The W3550 has a higher base clock of 3.07 GHz versus 2.80 GHz and a higher boost clock of 3.33 GHz versus 3.20 GHz for the X5560. Both chips share the same Nehalem architecture, 45 nm process, 4 cores, 8 threads, and identical cache sizes, so the clock speeds are the primary differentiator.

Q: Is there any advantage to choosing the Xeon X5560 instead?

A: The X5560 has a substantially lower thermal design power at 95 watts versus 130 watts for the W3550. This makes it the more power-efficient option for systems where heat output and cooling capacity are limiting factors, despite its slightly lower benchmark scores.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory and expansion features?

A: Yes. Both support DDR3 memory through a triple-channel memory bus, include ECC memory support, and use PCIe Gen 2. Both are also socket-compatible with Intel Socket 1366 and lack integrated graphics.

Q: How do these chips rank against all other CPUs in the database?

A: The W3550 sits in the 26th percentile of all CPUs, while the X5560 sits in the 25th percentile. Their average benchmark scores are 956 and 946, respectively, placing them in the same performance tier as several modern low-end and mid-range processors.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in exactly four specification fields: base clock, boost clock, thermal design power, and codename. The W3550 runs at a 3.07 GHz base clock and 3.33 GHz boost clock, while the X5560 runs at 2.80 GHz base and 3.20 GHz boost. The W3550 has a 130 watt TDP, while the X5560 has a 95 watt TDP. The codename also differs: Bloomfield for the W3550 and Gainestown for the X5560.

All other specifications are identical. Both have 4 cores and 8 threads, use the 45 nm process node, and are built on the Nehalem architecture. Both pack 731 million transistors on a 263 mm² die. Both feature 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. Both support DDR3 memory through a triple-channel memory bus with ECC capability. Both use PCIe Gen 2, lack integrated graphics, and have locked multipliers. Both target the server and workstation market segment and are end-of-life. Neither has a recorded launch MSRP.

The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Xeon W3550 as the better performer in every benchmark category recorded. It wins all five head-to-head tests with margins between 1% and 1.2%, and its average benchmark score of 956 exceeds the X5560's 946. Its higher base and boost clocks, 3.07 GHz and 3.33 GHz respectively, give it a consistent edge in both single-core and multi-core workloads. For workloads where raw rendering performance in Cinebench matters, the W3550 is the clear choice.

The Intel Xeon X5560, however, offers a meaningful counterpoint in power efficiency. Its 95 watt TDP versus 130 watts for the W3550 means it draws less power and generates less heat, which can be decisive in server environments with strict thermal budgets or high-density chassis. The performance penalty is small, roughly 1% across the board, but it is consistent. For deployments where power consumption is a primary constraint, the X5560's lower TDP may outweigh its slightly lower benchmark scores.

Neither processor offers features the other lacks. They share the same socket, memory support, cache configuration, and PCIe generation. The choice between them comes down to whether the user prioritizes the W3550's slightly higher performance or the X5560's substantially lower thermal envelope. The benchmark data shows the W3550 is faster, but the X5560 is more efficient. For most compute-bound tasks, the W3550's 1% to 1.2% advantage is real but modest; for power-sensitive deployments, the X5560's 35 watt TDP reduction is the more significant number.