Xeon E5645 vs Core i5-3470
Aggregate performance score
Xeon E5645 outperforms i5-3470 by a small 8% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core i5-3470 and Xeon E5645 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1580 | 1538 |
| Place by popularity | 10 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.47 | 1.70 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Series | Intel Core i5 (Desktop) | no data |
| Architecture codename | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) | Westmere-EP (2010−2011) |
| Release date | 8 April 2012 (12 years ago) | 16 March 2010 (14 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $184 | $294 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Xeon E5645 has 16% better value for money than i5-3470.
Detailed specifications
Core i5-3470 and Xeon E5645 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) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | 3.2 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.6 GHz | 2.67 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 256 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 6 MB | 12 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 132.8 mm2 | 239 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 67 °C | 76 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 67 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 1,170 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Core i5-3470 and Xeon E5645 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 | FCLGA1155 | 1366 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 77 Watt | 80 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i5-3470 and Xeon E5645. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
Security technologies
Core i5-3470 and Xeon E5645 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i5-3470 and Xeon E5645 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i5-3470 and Xeon E5645. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 32 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel HD Graphics 2500 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i5-3470 and Xeon E5645.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 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 E5645 outperforms Core i5-3470 by 8% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Xeon E5645 outperforms Core i5-3470 by 8% in Passmark.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
Benchmark coverage: 41%
Core i5-3470 outperforms Xeon E5645 by 71% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Benchmark coverage: 41%
Core i5-3470 outperforms Xeon E5645 by 4% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.02 | 3.26 |
| Recency | 8 April 2012 | 16 March 2010 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 6 |
| Threads | 4 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 77 Watt | 80 Watt |
i5-3470 has an age advantage of 2 years, a 45.5% more advanced lithography process, and 3.9% lower power consumption.
Xeon E5645, on the other hand, has a 7.9% higher aggregate performance score, and 50% more physical cores and 200% more threads.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Core i5-3470 and Xeon E5645.
Note that Core i5-3470 is a desktop processor while Xeon E5645 is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i5-3470 and Xeon E5645, 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.
