Xeon w9-3595X vs Athlon II X2 265

Aggregate performance score

Athlon II X2 265
2010
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.80
Xeon w9-3595X
2024
60 cores / 120 threads, 385 Watt
62.48
+7710%

Xeon w9-3595X outperforms Athlon II X2 265 by a whopping 7710% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Athlon II X2 265 and Xeon w9-3595X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking260313
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.6420.21
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Power efficiency1.1615.29
Architecture codenameRegor (2009−2013)Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024)
Release date21 September 2010 (14 years ago)24 August 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$83$5,889

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon w9-3595X has 1132% better value for money than Athlon II X2 265.

Detailed specifications

Athlon II X2 265 and Xeon w9-3595X 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 cores2 (Dual-core)60 (Hexaconta-Core)
Threads2120
Base clock speed3.3 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed3.3 GHz4.8 GHz
L1 cache128 KB80 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB2 MB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB112.5 MB
Chip lithography45 nmIntel 7 nm
Die size117 mm24x 477 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data81 °C
Number of transistors410 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Athlon II X2 265 and Xeon w9-3595X 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
SocketAM3FCLGA4677
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt385 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon II X2 265 and Xeon w9-3595X. 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 II X2 265 and Xeon w9-3595X 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 II X2 265 and Xeon w9-3595X are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon II X2 265 and Xeon w9-3595X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR2, DDR3DDR5-4800
Maximum memory sizeno data4 TB
Max memory channelsno data8
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon II X2 265 and Xeon w9-3595X.

PCIe version2.05.0
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 II X2 265 0.80
Xeon w9-3595X 62.48
+7710%

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 II X2 265 1267
Xeon w9-3595X 98888
+7705%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.80 62.48
Recency 21 September 2010 24 August 2024
Physical cores 2 60
Threads 2 120
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 385 Watt

Athlon II X2 265 has 492.3% lower power consumption.

Xeon w9-3595X, on the other hand, has a 7710% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, and 2900% more physical cores and 5900% more threads.

The Xeon w9-3595X is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon II X2 265 in performance tests.

Note that Athlon II X2 265 is a desktop processor while Xeon w9-3595X is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon II X2 265 and Xeon w9-3595X, 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 II X2 265
Athlon II X2 265
Intel Xeon w9-3595X
Xeon w9-3595X

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.


3.4 39 votes

Rate Athlon II X2 265 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 35 votes

Rate Xeon w9-3595X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon II X2 265 or Xeon w9-3595X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.