In Rust, the Core i3-550 is slightly slower than the Xeon E3-1280. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i3-550
- Consumes up to 23% less energy – 73 vs 95 Watts
- Consumes up to 23% less energy
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
Xeon E3-1280
- Up to 1% faster in Rust – 210 vs 208 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Rust
- Is 10 months and 3 days newer – Apr 03, 2011 vs May 30, 2010
- Is 10 months and 3 days newer
Rust FPS Calculator
Core i3-550 vs Xeon E3-1280: Comparison of performance and price
Core i3-550
May 30th, 2010
Average FPS
208 FPS
99%
Min 1% FPS
40 FPS
93%
Price, $
$129.94
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.62/FPS
100%
All items are out of stock
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i3-550 vs Xeon E3-1280 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i3-550 vs Xeon E3-1280 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i3-550
May 30th, 2010
Cores
2-core
50%
L3 Cache
4 MB
50%
Base Frequency
3.2 GHz
91%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1333 MHz
100%
Xeon E3-1280
Apr 3rd, 2011
Cores
4-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.5 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.9 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i3-550 May 30th, 2010 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Xeon E3-1280 Apr 3rd, 2011 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| May 30th, 2010 | Release Date | Apr 3rd, 2011 |
| $138.00 | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Server |
| LGA1156 | Socket | LGA1155 |
73W | Power Consumption | 95W |
| Other Features | ||
| 1333 MHz (DDR3) | RAM | DDR3 |
Intel HD | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
