Xeon X5698 vs Core i7-965

Primary details

Comparing Core i7-965 and Xeon X5698 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking	1730	1724
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	2.45	0.11
Market segment	Desktop processor	Server
Architecture codename	Bloomfield (2008−2010)	Westmere-EP (2010−2011)
Release date	November 2008 (15 years ago)	14 February 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$1,509	no data
Current price	$150 (0.1x MSRP)	$997

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

i7-965 has 2127% better value for money than Xeon X5698.

Detailed specifications

Core i7-965 and Xeon X5698 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	4 (Quad-Core)	2 (Dual-core)
Threads	8	4
Base clock speed	3.2 GHz	4.4 GHz
Boost clock speed	3.46 GHz	4.4 GHz
L1 cache	64 KB (per core)	64 KB (per core)
L2 cache	256 KB (per core)	256 KB (per core)
L3 cache	8 MB (shared)	12288 KB (shared)
Chip lithography	45 nm	32 nm
Die size	263 mm2	239 mm2
Maximum core temperature	68 °C	no data
Number of transistors	731 million	1,170 million
64 bit support	+	+
Windows 11 compatibility	-	-
Unlocked multiplier	Yes	No

Compatibility

Information on Core i7-965 and Xeon X5698 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	1	2
Socket	FCLGA1366	1366
Power consumption (TDP)	130 Watt	130 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-965 and Xeon X5698. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions	Intel® SSE4.2	no data
AES-NI	-	+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)	+	+
Turbo Boost Technology	1.0	no data
Hyper-Threading Technology	+	+
Idle States	+	no data
Thermal Monitoring	-	no data
Demand Based Switching	-	no data
PAE	36 Bit	no data
Status	Discontinued	no data

Security technologies

Core i7-965 and Xeon X5698 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT	+	+
EDB	+	no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-965 and Xeon X5698 are enumerated here.

VT-x	+	+
EPT	+	no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-965 and Xeon X5698. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory types	DDR3	DDR3
Maximum memory size	24 GB	no data
Max memory channels	3	no data
Maximum memory bandwidth	25.6 GB/s	no data
ECC memory support	-	no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-965 and Xeon X5698.

PCIe version

no data

2.0

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Xeon X5698 outperforms Core i7-965 by 1% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

---

Pros & cons summary

---

Performance score	2.21	2.23
Physical cores	4	2
Threads	8	4
Chip lithography	45 nm	32 nm

---

Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-965 and Xeon X5698, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.

---