Atom C3808 vs Xeon X5450
Aggregate performance score
Atom C3808 outperforms Xeon X5450 by a whopping 135% 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 | 2420 | 1767 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.03 | 0.43 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Series | no data | Intel Atom |
| Power efficiency | 1.22 | 13.81 |
| Designer | Intel | Intel |
| Manufacturer | Intel | no data |
| Architecture codename | Harpertown (2007−2008) | Goldmont (2016−2017) |
| Release date | 11 November 2007 (18 years ago) | 15 August 2017 (8 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $851 | $369 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Atom C3808 has 1333% better value for money than Xeon X5450.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Xeon X5450 and Atom C3808 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) | 12 (Dodeca-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | 3 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 22 |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 672 KB |
| L2 cache | 6 MB (per die) | 12 MB |
| L3 cache | 12 MB L2 Cache | 12 MB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 2x 107 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 86 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 63 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 820 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | 0.85V-1.35V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon X5450 and Atom C3808 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 | 2 | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | LGA771 | FCBGA1310 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 120 Watt | 25 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon X5450 and Atom C3808. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| QuickAssist | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | - |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Demand Based Switching | + | no data |
| FSB parity | + | no data |
Security technologies
Xeon X5450 and Atom C3808 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
| EDB | + | + |
| Secure Boot | no data | + |
| SGX | no data | - |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon X5450 and Atom C3808 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon X5450 and Atom C3808. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR2, DDR3 Depends on motherboard | DDR4: 2133 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 256 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 34.134 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon X5450 and Atom C3808.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 3 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 16 |
| USB revision | no data | 3 |
| Total number of SATA ports | no data | 16 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 8 |
| Integrated LAN | no data | 4x10/2.5/1 GBE |
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 | 1.37 | 3.22 |
| Recency | 11 November 2007 | 15 August 2017 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 12 |
| Threads | 4 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 120 Watt | 25 Watt |
Atom C3808 has a 135% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, 200% more physical cores and 200% more threads, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 380% lower power consumption.
The Intel Atom C3808 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Xeon X5450 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
