Ultra 9 288V vs Xeon X5675
Aggregate performance score
Core Ultra 9 288V outperforms Xeon X5675 by a whopping 211% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Xeon X5675 and Core Ultra 9 288V processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1422 | 622 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 4.08 | no data |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Power efficiency | 4.01 | 39.50 |
| Architecture codename | Westmere-EP (2010−2011) | Lunar Lake (2024) |
| Release date | 14 February 2011 (13 years ago) | 24 September 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $162 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Xeon X5675 and Core Ultra 9 288V 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 | 6 (Hexa-Core) | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Performance-cores | no data | 4 |
| Low Power Efficient-cores | no data | 4 |
| Threads | 12 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | 3.06 GHz | 3.3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.46 GHz | 5.1 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 37 MHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 2.5 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 12288 KB (shared) | 12 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 3 nm |
| Die size | 239 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 81 °C | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1,170 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon X5675 and Core Ultra 9 288V 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 |
| Socket | FCLGA1366,LGA1366 | FCBGA2833 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 30 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon X5675 and Core Ultra 9 288V. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.2 | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 1.0 | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | - |
| TSX | - | + |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Demand Based Switching | + | no data |
| PAE | 40 Bit | no data |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | + |
| Deep Learning Boost | - | + |
| Supported AI Software Frameworks | - | OpenVINO™, WindowsML, DirectML, ONNX RT, WebNN |
Security technologies
Xeon X5675 and Core Ultra 9 288V technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | + |
| EDB | + | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon X5675 and Core Ultra 9 288V are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon X5675 and Core Ultra 9 288V. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR5 |
| Maximum memory size | 288 GB | 32 GB |
| Max memory channels | 3 | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 32 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel Arc Graphics 140V |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 2.05 GHz |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Xeon X5675 and Core Ultra 9 288V integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Xeon X5675 and Core Ultra 9 288V integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | no data | 4096 x 2304 @ 60Hz (HDMI 2.1 TMDS) 7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz (HDMI2.1 FRL) |
| Max resolution over eDP | no data | 3840x2400 @ 120Hz |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | no data | 7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Xeon X5675 and Core Ultra 9 288V integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | 12.2 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon X5675 and Core Ultra 9 288V.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 4 |
| PCI support | no data | 5.0 and 4.0 |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 4.03 | 12.52 |
| Recency | 14 February 2011 | 24 September 2024 |
| Physical cores | 6 | 8 |
| Threads | 12 | 8 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 3 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 30 Watt |
Xeon X5675 has 50% more threads.
Ultra 9 288V, on the other hand, has a 210.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, 33.3% more physical cores, a 966.7% more advanced lithography process, and 216.7% lower power consumption.
The Core Ultra 9 288V is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon X5675 in performance tests.
Be aware that Xeon X5675 is a server/workstation processor while Core Ultra 9 288V is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon X5675 and Core Ultra 9 288V, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
