In Deathloop, the Core i3-550 is slightly faster than the Xeon X3470. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i3-550
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop – 223 vs 221 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop
- Is 8 months and 20 days newer – May 30, 2010 vs Sep 08, 2009
- Is 8 months and 20 days newer
- 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 X3470
No clear advantages
Deathloop FPS Calculator
Core i3-550 vs Xeon X3470: Comparison of performance and price
Core i3-550
May 30th, 2010
Average FPS
223 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
167 FPS
100%
Price, $
$129.94
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.58/FPS
100%
All items are out of stock
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i3-550 vs Xeon X3470 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i3-550 vs Xeon X3470 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
100%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1333 MHz
100%
Xeon X3470
Sep 8th, 2009
Cores
4-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.933 GHz
92%
Turbo Frequency
3.6 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1333 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i3-550 May 30th, 2010 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Xeon X3470 Sep 8th, 2009 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
May 30th, 2010 | Release Date | Sep 8th, 2009 |
$138.00 | MSRP | $589.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Server |
| LGA1156 | Socket | LGA1156 |
73W | Power Consumption | 95W |
| Other Features | ||
| 1333 MHz (DDR3) | RAM | 1333 MHz (DDR3) |
Intel HD | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
