Overclocking Intel’s Xeon E5620: Quad-Core 32 nm At 4+ GHz

Benchmark Results: Synthetics

Synthetic tests are most likely going to show off the underlying differences between each of these three CPUs, even when real-world apps aren’t able to.

Sure enough, 3DMark Vantage rewards the hexa-core platform, even if a vast majority of actual games fail to exhibit performance gains to match.

Interestingly, the Xeon E5620’s larger L3 cache doesn’t translate to a higher 3DMark score than what the Core i7-930 posts.

An aggressive memory clock gives the Xeon a marked lead in PCMark Vantage, making more of an impact than the Core i7-970’s two extra cores.

Scaling in the Arithmetic benchmark is as-expected. The Xeon E5620 and Core i7-930 at 4 GHz put down almost identical results, while the six-core Gulftown chip is roughly 50% more potent.

The Multimedia metric yields similar results, with the i7-930 and Xeon on-par. The Core i7-970 again puts a roughly 50% margin over the quad-core chips, reflecting its core count.

Memory bandwidth on all three overclocked platforms is impressive thanks to higher-than-stock frequency settings. The stock Xeon E5620, employing DDR3-1066, can’t quite crack 20 GB/s.

Create a new thread in the UK Article comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
Comment from the forums
    Your comment
  • mi1ez
    Well that was a bit pointless....
  • LePhuronn
    Well given that I have run a couple of i7 920s at 4GHz on 1.3V and never hit 75 degrees with good air coolers I don't see me jumping any time soon...
  • gdilord
    On the last page:
    Consequently, it runs less hot and consumes less power.

    I think that "Consequently, it runs cooler and consumes less power" would be a lot less cumbersome.