Xeon X3450 vs Core i7-3520M
Aggregate performance score
i7-3520M outperforms Xeon X3450 by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core i7-3520M and Xeon X3450 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1926 | 1931 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.36 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | Intel Core i7 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) | no data |
| Release date | 3 June 2012 (12 years ago) | 1 July 2009 (15 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $346 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Core i7-3520M and Xeon X3450 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | no data |
| Threads | 4 | no data |
| Base clock speed | 2.9 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 3.6 GHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | no data |
| L3 cache | 4 MB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | no data |
| Die size | 118 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | 73 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Core i7-3520M and Xeon X3450 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 | 1 |
| Socket | BGA1023, PGA988 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 95 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-3520M and Xeon X3450. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | no data |
| AVX | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
Security technologies
Core i7-3520M and Xeon X3450 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-3520M and Xeon X3450 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | no data |
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-3520M and Xeon X3450. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 21 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel HD Graphics 4000 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-3520M and Xeon X3450.
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 16 |
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.
Core i7-3520M outperforms Xeon X3450 by 1% 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%
Core i7-3520M outperforms Xeon X3450 by 1% 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 i7-3520M outperforms Xeon X3450 by 32% 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%
Xeon X3450 outperforms Core i7-3520M by 26% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.85 | 1.84 |
| Recency | 3 June 2012 | 1 July 2009 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 95 Watt |
i7-3520M has a 0.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and 171.4% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Core i7-3520M and Xeon X3450.
Be aware that Core i7-3520M is a notebook processor while Xeon X3450 is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-3520M and Xeon X3450, 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.
