Xeon w7-3565X vs Athlon 64 FX-55

Aggregate performance score

Athlon 64 FX-55
2004
1 core / 1 thread, 104 Watt
0.25
Xeon w7-3565X
2024
32 cores / 64 threads, 335 Watt
48.25
+19200%

Xeon w7-3565X outperforms Athlon 64 FX-55 by a whopping 19200% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Athlon 64 FX-55 and Xeon w7-3565X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking314736
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data49.68
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Power efficiency0.2313.63
Architecture codenameClawhammer (2001−2005)Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024)
Release date10 October 2004 (20 years ago)24 August 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$180$2,689

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Athlon 64 FX-55 and Xeon w7-3565X have a nearly equal value for money.

Detailed specifications

Athlon 64 FX-55 and Xeon w7-3565X 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 cores1 (Single-Core)32 (Dotriaconta-Core)
Threads164
Base clock speed2.6 GHz2.5 GHz
Boost clock speed2.6 GHz4.8 GHz
L1 cache128 KB80 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB2 MB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB82.5 MB
Chip lithography130 nmIntel 7 nm
Die size193 mm24x 477 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)63 °C79 °C
Number of transistors105 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplier++

Compatibility

Information on Athlon 64 FX-55 and Xeon w7-3565X 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 configuration11
Socket939FCLGA4677
Power consumption (TDP)104 Watt335 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 FX-55 and Xeon w7-3565X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® AMX, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2.0
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
TSX-+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data+
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Athlon 64 FX-55 and Xeon w7-3565X technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
SGXno data-
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon 64 FX-55 and Xeon w7-3565X are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 FX-55 and Xeon w7-3565X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1 Depends on motherboardDDR5-4800
Maximum memory sizeno data4 TB
Max memory channelsno data8
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)N/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon 64 FX-55 and Xeon w7-3565X.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanesno data112

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.

Athlon 64 FX-55 0.25
Xeon w7-3565X 48.25
+19200%

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.

Athlon 64 FX-55 404
Xeon w7-3565X 76649
+18873%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.25 48.25
Recency 10 October 2004 24 August 2024
Physical cores 1 32
Threads 1 64
Power consumption (TDP) 104 Watt 335 Watt

Athlon 64 FX-55 has 222.1% lower power consumption.

Xeon w7-3565X, on the other hand, has a 19200% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 19 years, and 3100% more physical cores and 6300% more threads.

The Xeon w7-3565X is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon 64 FX-55 in performance tests.

Note that Athlon 64 FX-55 is a desktop processor while Xeon w7-3565X is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 FX-55 and Xeon w7-3565X, 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.


AMD Athlon 64 FX-55
Athlon 64 FX-55
Intel Xeon w7-3565X
Xeon w7-3565X

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 3 votes

Rate Athlon 64 FX-55 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Xeon w7-3565X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon 64 FX-55 or Xeon w7-3565X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.