Xeon W5590 vs Apple M4 Pro (12 cores)
Aggregate performance score
M4 Pro (12 cores) outperforms Xeon W5590 by a whopping 881% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 369 | 2135 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.20 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | Apple M4 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 24.75 | 0.62 |
| Designer | Apple | Intel |
| Manufacturer | no data | Intel |
| Architecture codename | no data | Gainestown (2009−2010) |
| Release date | 30 October 2024 (1 year ago) | 9 August 2009 (16 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $270 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
M4 Pro (12 cores) and Xeon W5590 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 12 (Dodeca-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 12 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | 2.592 GHz | 3.33 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.51 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 4 MB | 256 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 8 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 3 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | no data | 263 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 67 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 731 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
Compatibility
Information on M4 Pro (12 cores) and Xeon W5590 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | no data | 2 |
| Socket | no data | FCLGA1366 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 32 Watt | 130 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by M4 Pro (12 cores) and Xeon W5590. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 1.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | + |
| PAE | no data | 40 Bit |
Security technologies
M4 Pro (12 cores) and Xeon W5590 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by M4 Pro (12 cores) and Xeon W5590 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by M4 Pro (12 cores) and Xeon W5590. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 144 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 3 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 32 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Apple M4 16-core GPU | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by M4 Pro (12 cores) and Xeon W5590.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
Synthetic benchmarks
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 18.64 | 1.90 |
| Recency | 30 October 2024 | 9 August 2009 |
| Physical cores | 12 | 4 |
| Threads | 12 | 8 |
| Chip lithography | 3 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 32 Watt | 130 Watt |
Apple M4 Pro (12 cores) has a 881.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, 200% more physical cores and 50% more threads, a 1400% more advanced lithography process, and 306.3% lower power consumption.
The Apple M4 Pro (12 cores) is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Xeon W5590 in performance tests.
Be aware that Apple M4 Pro (12 cores) is a notebook processor while Xeon W5590 is a server/workstation one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
