Core i7-2820QM vs Xeon X5647

Core i7-2820QM

4 Cores8 Thrd45 WWMax: 3.4 GHz2011

Xeon X5647

4 Cores8 Thrd130 WWMax: 3.2 GHz2011

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i7-2820QM

4 / 8

4,379

0.0%

4,441

+1.4%

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Core i7-2820QM is positioned at rank 1138 and the Xeon X5647 is on rank 593, so the Xeon X5647 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Core i7-2820QM

#1126

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

3805%

#1127

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

3750%

#1128

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

3442%

#1129

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

3427%

#1130

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

3395%

#1132

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

3279%

#1133

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

3144%

#1134

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

3139%

#1135

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

3054%

#1138

Core i7-2820QM

MSRP: $568|Avg: N/A

100%

#1139

Core i5-520M

MSRP: $225|Avg: N/A

100%

#1141

Celeron 807

MSRP: $70|Avg: $10

99%

#1142

Pentium B950

MSRP: $134|Avg: $35

99%

#1143

Celeron 220

MSRP: $42|Avg: $42

99%

#1144

Pentium B960

MSRP: $134|Avg: $15

99%

#1146

Pentium 957

MSRP: $134|Avg: $10

98%

#1147

Core 2 Duo SL9400

MSRP: $284|Avg: N/A

98%

#1149

Pentium N3540

MSRP: $161|Avg: $161

97%

#1150

Core i7-3555LE

MSRP: $300|Avg: $280

97%

#1151

Core i3-2377M

MSRP: $250|Avg: N/A

96%

#1152

Core 2 Duo E8435

MSRP: $150|Avg: $74

95%

#1153

Celeron M 723

MSRP: $161|Avg: $161

95%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Xeon X5647

Xeon Platinum 8454H

MSRP: $6540|Avg: N/A

9357%

Xeon Gold 6240R

MSRP: $2444|Avg: N/A

1767%

#10

Xeon 6337P

MSRP: $60|Avg: $5

1570%

#15

EPYC 9174F

MSRP: $194|Avg: $30

1213%

#355

Xeon w7-3455

MSRP: $2489|Avg: $2625

99%

#356

EPYC 9334

MSRP: $2990|Avg: $1810

99%

#357

Xeon w9-3575X

MSRP: $3789|Avg: $675

98%

#358

Xeon w7-3465X

MSRP: $2889|Avg: $468

98%

#359

Xeon Gold 6530

MSRP: $2128|Avg: $1846

97%

#359

EPYC 9354

MSRP: $3420|Avg: $2498

97%

#361

Xeon Silver 4114

MSRP: $612|Avg: $30

96%

#362

EPYC 7532

MSRP: $2380|Avg: $225

96%

#363

Xeon W-2191B

MSRP: $1333|Avg: $39

96%

#593

Xeon X5647

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#594

Xeon E5-1620 v2

MSRP: $294|Avg: $50

100%

#605

Xeon E3-1270 v3

MSRP: $339|Avg: $410

96%

#607

Xeon E3-1235

MSRP: $240|Avg: $270

96%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Use Case Distinction: This is a comparison between a Professional Workstation processor ($0) and a Consumer Desktop CPU. The Xeon X5647 is engineered for massive parallel workloads (rendering, scientific simulations), offering significantly higher core counts.

Insight	Core i7-2820QM	Xeon X5647
Gaming	✅ Superior gaming performance	❌ Lower gaming performance
Workstation	❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks	✅ Better multi-core power
Price	⚠️ Higher cost ($568)	✅ More affordable ($0)
Longevity	🛑 Legacy (Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) / 32 nm)	🛑 Legacy (Westmere-EP (2010−2011) / 32 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

The Core i7-2820QM ($568), however, is optimized for mixed workloads and gaming. For most users, it offers superior single-thread performance and responsiveness at a fraction of the cost ($568 less, Infinity% cheaper), making it the better choice for daily use and gaming.

Insight	Core i7-2820QM	Xeon X5647
Cost Efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	⚠️ Higher cost ($568)	✅ More affordable ($0)

Performance Check

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Core i7-2820QM Benchmark Check

Xeon X5647 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-2820QM and Xeon X5647

Core i7-2820QM

The Core i7-2820QM is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 January 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.3 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1066, DDR3-1333, DDR3-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 4,379 points. Launch price was $568.

Xeon X5647

The Xeon X5647 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 14 February 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Westmere-EP (2010−2011) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.93 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1366. Thermal design power (TDP): 130 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 4,441 points. Launch price was $175.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core i7-2820QM and Xeon X5647 share an identical 4-core/8-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.4 GHz on the Core i7-2820QM versus 3.2 GHz on the Xeon X5647 — a 6.1% clock advantage for the Core i7-2820QM (base: 2.3 GHz vs 2.93 GHz). The Core i7-2820QM uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Xeon X5647 uses Westmere-EP (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-2820QM scores 4,379 against the Xeon X5647's 4,441 — a 1.4% lead for the Xeon X5647. L3 cache: 8 MB (total) on the Core i7-2820QM vs 12 MB (total) on the Xeon X5647.

Feature	Core i7-2820QM	Xeon X5647
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	4 / 8
Boost Clock	3.4 GHz+6%	3.2 GHz
Base Clock	2.3 GHz	2.93 GHz+27%
L3 Cache	8 MB (total)	12 MB (total)+50%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256 kB (per core)
Process	32 nm	32 nm
Architecture	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)	Westmere-EP (2010−2011)
PassMark	4,379	4,441+1%
Geekbench 6 Single	554	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	1,763	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-2820QM uses the PGA988 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Xeon X5647 uses LGA1366 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 1600 on the Core i7-2820QM versus DDR3-1066 on the Xeon X5647 — the Core i7-2820QM supports 199.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i7-2820QM) vs 3 (Xeon X5647). Chipset compatibility: HM65,HM67,QM67,QS67 (Core i7-2820QM) and Intel X58,Intel 5520 (Xeon X5647).

Feature	Core i7-2820QM	Xeon X5647
Socket	PGA988	LGA1366
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 5.0+150%
Max RAM Speed	1600+53233%	DDR3-1066
Max RAM Capacity	32	—
RAM Channels	2	3+50%
ECC Support	❌	✅
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: true (Core i7-2820QM) vs VT-x, VT-d (Xeon X5647). The Core i7-2820QM includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 3000), while the Xeon X5647 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Xeon X5647 targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Core i7-2820QM rivals AMD A8-3510MX; Xeon X5647 rivals Core i7-980X.