Intel Xeon L5408

The Intel Xeon L5408 is a 4-core, 4-thread server processor from the Harpertown generation, built on Intel’s 45 nm process. With a base clock of 2.13 GHz, a 40 W TDP, and support for ECC memory, it targets legacy server and workstation workloads. Benchmark results place it near the bottom of the overall CPU distribution, with a percentile rank of 9, meaning it outperforms roughly 9% of all processors in the database. Its average benchmark score of 517 aligns closely with several older desktop and mobile parts, indicating that its compute capabilities are modest by modern standards.

How It Compares

Against the Intel Core i3-3110M, the Xeon L5408 is effectively a statistical tie. Both processors achieve an identical average benchmark score of 517, with a delta of 0%. This is notable because the i3-3110M is a dual-core mobile part with hyper-threading, while the Xeon L5408 is a quad-core server chip without hyper-threading. The equal scores suggest that the Xeon’s additional physical cores compensate for its older architecture and lower clock speed, but it does not pull ahead in aggregate performance.

Compared to the AMD Phenom II X3 B75, the Xeon L5408 holds a marginal 0.3% advantage. The Phenom II X3 B75 scores 515 on average, versus 517 for the Xeon. This 2-point gap is within run-to-run variance, but the data consistently places the Xeon slightly ahead. The Phenom is a triple-core desktop part, so the Xeon’s fourth core appears to provide a small edge in multi-threaded workloads, though the difference is too small to be considered meaningful in real-world use.

The AMD Phenom II X4 910 edges out the Xeon L5408 by 0.4%. The Phenom II X4 910 averages 519, compared to the Xeon’s 517. This 2-point deficit places the Xeon behind a similarly quad-core desktop processor from the same era. The Phenom’s higher clock speeds likely account for this difference, as both chips feature four cores and comparable cache hierarchies. Benchmark results indicate the Xeon L5408 is not competitive even with its direct contemporary rivals in raw throughput.

The Intel Celeron G1840 outperforms the Xeon L5408 by 0.7%. The Celeron G1840 scores 520 on average, while the Xeon sits at 517. This is a 3-point gap. The Celeron is a dual-core, dual-thread budget desktop part from a much later generation, yet it still surpasses the Xeon. This highlights how far architecture improvements have come: the Xeon’s older Core 2 architecture cannot match the efficiency of newer designs, even those with fewer cores.

Who Should Consider It

For gaming, the Xeon L5408 is poorly suited. Its single-core score in Cinebench R23 is 212, which is extremely low by current standards. Many modern games rely heavily on single-thread performance, and this chip’s 2.13 GHz base clock and lack of boost capability will bottleneck frame rates. The data shows a Cinebench R20 single-core score of 89, reinforcing that the processor struggles with lightly threaded tasks. Users seeking any playable experience in contemporary titles should look elsewhere.

For content creation, the picture is slightly better but still limited. The multi-core scores, 631 in Cinebench R20 and 1503 in Cinebench R23, indicate that the processor can handle basic rendering or encoding tasks, but only at low resolutions or with long render times. The 4-core, 4-thread configuration without hyper-threading caps its parallel throughput. Compared to the nearest rivals, it is not faster than a quad-core Phenom II X4 910, so it offers no advantage for creation workloads. It might be acceptable for occasional, non-professional use, but not for sustained production work.

For office and productivity tasks, the Xeon L5408 is adequate for basic operations like word processing, spreadsheets, and web browsing. The 517 average benchmark score places it in the same league as dual-core mobile processors, which are still capable of light office duties. However, the lack of modern instruction sets and low clock speed mean that even these tasks may feel sluggish compared to any recent processor. Its 40 W TDP is low, making it an option for power-sensitive legacy systems, but the performance ceiling is very low.

For server and workstation use, the Xeon L5408’s ECC memory support and Socket 771 platform are its main selling points. It is an end-of-life product, so it is not recommended for new deployments. Existing systems with this chip can still run legacy server software, but the 9th percentile ranking shows it is far behind even entry-level modern CPUs. Its dual-channel memory support and PCIe Gen 2 interface are outdated, limiting expansion options.

Benchmark Performance

The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 1503 places the Xeon L5408 at the low end of the spectrum. This is 0.3% higher than the AMD Phenom II X3 B75’s equivalent performance, but 0.4% lower than the Phenom II X4 910. The delta against the Intel Core i3-3110M is 0%, meaning the Xeon delivers the same multi-core result as a dual-core mobile chip. This suggests that the Xeon’s four cores are inefficient, likely due to the older Core 2 architecture lacking modern optimizations.

Single-core performance is even more telling. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 212 is exceptionally low. In Cinebench R20, the single-core score is 89, while the multi-core score is 631, giving a rough scaling factor of about 7x from one core to four. This indicates that the processor scales reasonably well across cores, but the absolute per-core performance is weak. The Cinebench R15 multi-core score of 151 further confirms the chip’s modest throughput.

The average benchmark score of 517 is the key metric for comparing to rivals. The Intel Core i3-3110M matches this exactly, with a delta of 0%. The AMD Phenom II X3 B75 falls just 0.3% behind, while the AMD Phenom II X4 910 is 0.4% ahead. The Intel Celeron G1840 leads by 0.7%. These deltas are all within the noise margin, meaning the Xeon L5408 is essentially performance-equivalent to these four very different processors. This is an unusual situation: a quad-core server chip, a dual-core mobile chip, a triple-core desktop chip, and a dual-core desktop chip all land within 0.7% of each other.

The percentile ranking of 9 out of 100 underscores how far this chip falls behind the broader market. With an average score of 517, it sits in the bottom decile of all CPUs in the database. This is not a processor that can handle modern workloads; it is a relic of the 2008 era, released on 2008-02-26, and its performance reflects that age. The 45 nm process node and 820 million transistor count were advanced for their time, but they cannot compete with modern designs.

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score of the Intel Xeon L5408?

A: The average benchmark score is 517, which places it in the 9th percentile of all CPUs in the database.

Q: How does the Xeon L5408 compare to the Intel Core i3-3110M?

A: The two processors have identical average benchmark scores of 517, resulting in a delta of 0%. They are performance-equivalent in aggregate.

Q: What is the multi-core performance in Cinebench R23?

A: The Xeon L5408 scores 1503 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 0.4% lower than the AMD Phenom II X4 910 and 0.3% higher than the AMD Phenom II X3 B75.

Q: Does the Xeon L5408 support ECC memory?

A: Yes, ECC memory support is listed as true. The processor supports dual-channel DDR2 or DDR3 memory, depending on the motherboard.

Q: What socket does the Xeon L5408 use?

A: It uses Intel Socket 771, which is an older server socket. The processor is end-of-life and no longer in production.

Q: What is the single-core score in Cinebench R20?

A: The single-core score is 89, while the multi-core score is 631. This indicates very low per-core performance.

Platform and Compatibility

The Intel Xeon L5408 is designed for the Intel Socket 771 platform, which was used in server and workstation motherboards from the late 2000s. This socket is incompatible with modern consumer platforms, and motherboards supporting it are long out of production. The processor’s architecture is Core 2, with the codename Harpertown, and it is built on Intel’s 45 nm process node with 820 million transistors and a die size of 2x 107 mm². This dual-die design means each die contains 6 MB of L2 cache, for a total of 12 MB across the package.

Memory support is dual-channel, with ECC capability. The processor can use DDR2 or DDR3 memory, but the specific type depends on the motherboard. This flexibility was typical for server chips of that era, allowing system builders to choose between older or newer memory technologies. However, the memory bus is only dual-channel, which limits memory bandwidth compared to modern quad-channel or higher configurations. The lack of a listed memory bandwidth figure means no quantitative comparison is possible, but the dual-channel interface is a bottleneck for memory-intensive workloads.

The processor supports PCIe Gen 2, which was current at the time of its release. This allows for expansion cards and storage devices that are PCIe 2.0 compliant. However, PCIe Gen 2 is two generations old as of the data in this database, and it will not support the bandwidth requirements of modern GPUs or NVMe drives. The platform’s upgrade path is essentially nonexistent: Socket 771 was replaced by newer server sockets, and no modern CPUs use this interface. The Xeon L5408 is end-of-life, with a production status of end-of-life and a part number of SLAP5SLBBT.

The processor has 4 cores and 4 threads, with a base clock of 2.13 GHz and no boost clock. The multiplier is locked, preventing overclocking. Its 40 W TDP is notably low for a quad-core server chip, which makes it suitable for dense server deployments where power efficiency is critical. The L1 cache is 64 KB per core, and the L2 cache is 6 MB per die, but there is no L3 cache. This cache hierarchy is simple compared to modern processors, which often feature large L3 or even 3D V-Cache options, though the latter is not present here. The market segment is explicitly Server/Workstation, and the release date is 2008-02-26, confirming its vintage. No launch MSRP is provided in the data.