Intel Xeon X5470 vs Intel Xeon X5492 Comparison

The Intel Xeon X5492 and Intel Xeon X5470 are two nearly identical server processors from Intel's Harpertown generation, both built on the Core 2 architecture. The data reveals a consistent, though modest, performance advantage for the X5492 across every benchmark recorded, making the comparison more about incremental gains than fundamental differences. Both chips share the same core architecture, cache configuration, and socket, yet their clock speeds and thermal envelopes set them apart in measurable ways.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results paint a clear picture: the X5492 wins all five recorded head-to-head comparisons, but the margins are slim. In the Cinebench R15 multi-core test, the X5492 scores 249 against the X5470's 245, a delta of 1.6%. That is the largest performance gap in the entire dataset. Moving to Cinebench R20 multi-core, the X5492 posts 1039 versus 1024, a 1.5% advantage. The single-core results follow the same pattern, with the X5492 leading 146 to 144 in R20 single-core (1.4% delta) and 349 to 344 in R23 single-core (1.5% delta). The R23 multi-core test shows the X5492 at 2475 and the X5470 at 2440, again a 1.4% difference.

What is striking is not just that the X5492 wins, but how consistent the winning margin is across different workload types. Whether the test stresses all four cores or just one, the X5492 maintains roughly a 1.4% to 1.6% lead. This uniformity suggests the advantage comes from a fundamental clock speed difference rather than any workload-specific optimization. The average benchmark scores reinforce this: the X5492 averages 852 across all tests, while the X5470 averages 839, a difference of roughly 1.5%. In the broader context of all CPUs, the X5492 sits at the 23rd percentile, one point above the X5470's 22nd percentile. That percentile gap is small, but it places the two chips in slightly different tiers of the overall performance distribution.

The nearest rivals for each chip also tell a story. The X5492's closest competitor is the Intel Core i5-5250U, which scores 856 on average, a -0.4% delta from the X5492's 852. The X5470's nearest rival is the Intel Core i7-920 at 840, a -0.1% delta from its 839. Notably, the X5470's rival list includes the Xeon X3450 at 837, showing that the X5470 sits right at the edge of a performance cluster where a few points can shift rankings. The X5492, by contrast, edges out the AMD Athlon X4 830 (848, +0.4%) and the Core i5-2500T (856, -0.5%). These rival comparisons show that both Xeons are firmly in the mid-range of CPU performance circa their release, but the X5492's extra clock speed buys it a slightly more favorable position.

Architecture Differences

At the architectural level, these two chips are essentially siblings. Both use the Core 2 architecture with the Harpertown codename, manufactured on Intel's 45 nm process node. Each packs 820 million transistors across a dual-die design measuring 2x 107 mm². The cache hierarchy is identical: 64 KB of L1 per core and 6 MB of L2 per die, with no L3 cache present. Both support dual-channel DDR2 and DDR3 memory with ECC, and both use the Intel Socket 771. Neither has integrated graphics, and both are locked multipliers.

The single meaningful architectural difference is the base clock. The X5492 runs at 3.40 GHz, while the X5470 runs at 3.33 GHz. That 0.07 GHz difference is the entire source of the performance gap observed in the benchmarks. The higher clock speed also explains the TDP difference: the X5492 draws 150 watts, while the X5470 is rated at 120 watts. This 30-watt gap is significant for server cooling and power delivery considerations. The memory support field for the X5470 adds the caveat "Depends on motherboard," whereas the X5492 lists DDR2 and DDR3 without that qualifier. This could imply that the X5470's memory compatibility is more board-dependent, though the core memory controller capabilities are the same.

Both chips were released on the same date in September 2008 and are now end-of-life. Their launch MSRPs were close: the X5492 at $1493 and the X5470 at $1386. The part numbers differ, with the X5492 being SLBBD and the X5470 being SLBBF. The generation field is identical for both, reading "Xeon (Harpertown)," confirming they are from the same product family.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher base clock speed?

A: The Intel Xeon X5492 has a base clock of 3.40 GHz, while the Intel Xeon X5470 runs at 3.33 GHz. This 0.07 GHz difference is the primary driver of the performance gap between the two.

Q: How much faster is the X5492 in multi-core workloads?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the X5492 scores 2475 against the X5470's 2440, a 1.4% advantage. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the lead is 1.6%, with scores of 249 and 245 respectively.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon X5492 and the Intel Xeon X5470 support ECC memory. Both also support dual-channel DDR2 and DDR3 memory, though the X5470's support is noted as depending on the motherboard.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two chips?

A: The X5492 has a TDP of 150 watts, while the X5470 has a TDP of 120 watts. The X5492's higher power draw is a direct consequence of its higher clock speed.

Q: Are these processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No, neither the X5492 nor the X5470 has an unlocked multiplier. Both are locked processors.

Q: How do these chips compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The X5492's average benchmark score of 852 is 0.4% below the Intel Core i5-5250U's 856 and 0.4% above the AMD Athlon X4 830's 848. The X5470's average of 839 is 0.1% below the Intel Core i7-920's 840 and 0.1% above the Intel Core i5-3380M's 838.

Specification Differences

The following table highlights only the fields where the two processors differ:

| Specification | Intel Xeon X5492 | Intel Xeon X5470 |

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

| Base Clock | 3.40 GHz | 3.33 GHz |

| TDP | 150 W | 120 W |

| Launch MSRP | $1493 | $1386 |

| Part Number | SLBBD | SLBBF |

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

| Avg Benchmark Score | 852 | 839 |

| Percentile (vs. all CPUs) | 23rd | 22nd |

All other specifications—cores, threads, socket, architecture, codename, process node, transistors, die size, cache, memory bus, ECC, PCIe generation, integrated graphics, market segment, production status, release date, and multiplier lock status—are identical between the two.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon X5492 wins every benchmark in the dataset. It takes all five head-to-head tests, with deltas ranging from 1.4% to 1.6%. Its single-core advantage is consistent: 146 vs 144 in R20 single-core and 349 vs 344 in R23 single-core. Multi-core results follow suit, with the X5492 leading 1039 to 1024 in R20 and 2475 to 2440 in R23. The X5492 also holds a higher average benchmark score (852 vs 839) and a better percentile ranking (23rd vs 22nd).

The X5470 does not win any benchmark in this comparison. However, its lower TDP of 120 watts versus the X5492's 150 watts gives it a thermal efficiency advantage. For a server environment where power density and cooling capacity are constrained, the X5470 could be the more practical choice despite the slight performance deficit. The X5470 also launched at a lower MSRP of $1386 compared to the X5492's $1493, though the performance difference is only about 1.5%. In scenarios where every watt counts and the workload is not latency-sensitive, the X5470's lower power draw may offset its minor performance gap.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon X5492 is the faster processor. It wins every single benchmark by a margin of roughly 1.4% to 1.6%, and its average benchmark score is 852 versus 839. For anyone building a system where raw compute performance is the sole criterion, the X5492 is the correct choice. Its higher clock speed of 3.40 GHz over the X5470's 3.33 GHz translates directly into better Cinebench scores across all tests. The X5492's 23rd percentile ranking, while modest in absolute terms, places it one point above the X5470's 22nd percentile.

However, the X5470 should not be dismissed outright. Its 120-watt TDP is 30 watts lower than the X5492's 150-watt rating, which can be a decisive factor in dense server deployments where thermal limits are tight. The performance penalty for that power savings is small—about 1.5% on average—but the cumulative effect of lower power draw across hundreds of servers could be substantial. The X5470's lower launch MSRP of $1386 also makes it the more economical option on paper, though both chips are end-of-life and current pricing is not reflected in the data.

The choice ultimately hinges on priorities. If maximum benchmark performance matters most, the X5492 is the clear winner, as its 5-0 head-to-head record shows. If power efficiency and thermal headroom are more important than a 1.5% performance gain, the X5470 offers a compelling alternative. The data does not suggest any workload where the X5470 outperforms the X5492; it merely offers a different trade-off between speed and power consumption. For most use cases, the X5492's consistent leads across single-core and multi-core tests make it the safer recommendation for pure computing throughput.