i3-390M vs Xeon X5492

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon X5492
2008
150 Watt
1.87
+128%
Core i3-390M
2011
2 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
0.82

Xeon X5492 outperforms Core i3-390M by a whopping 128% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon X5492 and Core i3-390M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking19912594
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentServerLaptop
Seriesno dataIntel Core i3
Power efficiency1.162.18
Architecture codenameno dataArrandale (2010−2011)
Release date1 July 2008 (16 years ago)11 January 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$39

Detailed specifications

Xeon X5492 and Core i3-390M 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 coresno data2 (Dual-core)
Threadsno data4
Base clock speed3.4 GHz2.66 GHz
Boost clock speedno data0.07 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 1.0
Bus rateno data1 × 2.5 GT/s
Multiplierno data20
L1 cacheno data128 KB
L2 cacheno data512 KB
L3 cache12 MB L2 Cache3 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nm32 nm
Die sizeno data81+114 mm2
Maximum core temperature63 °C90 °C for rPGA, 105 °C for BGA
Number of transistorsno data382+177 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range0.85V-1.35Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Xeon X5492 and Core i3-390M 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 configurationno data1 (Uniprocessor)
SocketLGA771BGA1288,PGA988
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon X5492 and Core i3-390M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
FMA-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology-+
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Flex Memory Accessno data+
Demand Based Switching+no data
PAEno data36 Bit
FDIno data+
Fast Memory Accessno data+
FSB parity+no data

Security technologies

Xeon X5492 and Core i3-390M technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT--
EDB++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon X5492 and Core i3-390M are enumerated here.

VT-dno data-
VT-x++
EPT-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon X5492 and Core i3-390M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data17.051 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel® HD Graphics for Previous Generation Intel® Processors
Clear Videono data+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequencyno data667 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Xeon X5492 and Core i3-390M integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon X5492 and Core i3-390M.

PCIe versionno data2.0
PCI Express lanesno data16

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 X5492 1.87
+128%
i3-390M 0.82

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.

Xeon X5492 2912
+128%
i3-390M 1276

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.87 0.82
Recency 1 July 2008 11 January 2011
Chip lithography 45 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 35 Watt

Xeon X5492 has a 128% higher aggregate performance score.

i3-390M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 40.6% more advanced lithography process, and 328.6% lower power consumption.

The Xeon X5492 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i3-390M in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon X5492 is a server/workstation processor while Core i3-390M is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon X5492 and Core i3-390M, 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.


Intel Xeon X5492
Xeon X5492
Intel Core i3-390M
Core i3-390M

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.7 50 votes

Rate Xeon X5492 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 36 votes

Rate Core i3-390M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon X5492 or Core i3-390M, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.