Xeon E5-4655 v4 vs Atom x5-E3940

Aggregate performance score

Atom x5-E3940
2014
4 cores / 4 threads, 10 Watt
1.23
Xeon E5-4655 v4
2016
8 cores / 16 threads, 135 Watt
6.87
+459%

Xeon E5-4655 v4 outperforms Atom x5-E3940 by a whopping 459% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Atom x5-E3940 and Xeon E5-4655 v4 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking23091014
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.43
Market segmentLaptopServer
Series5x Intel AtomIntel Xeon E5
Power efficiency11.644.82
Architecture codenameApollo Lake (2014−2016)Broadwell (2015−2019)
Release date30 August 2014 (10 years ago)20 June 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$4,616

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Atom x5-E3940 and Xeon E5-4655 v4 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads416
Base clock speed1.6 GHz2.5 GHz
Boost clock speed1.8 GHz3.2 GHz
Bus typeno dataQPI
Bus rateno data2 × 9.6 GT/s
Multiplierno data25
L1 cache56K (per core)no data
L2 cache2 MB (shared)2 MB
L3 cache0 KB30 MB
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Die sizeno data246.24 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data82 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)103 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data3200 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Atom x5-E3940 and Xeon E5-4655 v4 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)4 (Multiprocessor)
SocketIntel BGA 1296FCLGA2011
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt135 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom x5-E3940 and Xeon E5-4655 v4. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® AVX2
AES-NI++
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2.0
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
TSX-+
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data-
PAEno data46 Bit

Security technologies

Atom x5-E3940 and Xeon E5-4655 v4 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom x5-E3940 and Xeon E5-4655 v4 are enumerated here.

VT-d++
VT-x++
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom x5-E3940 and Xeon E5-4655 v4. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-1866DDR4
Maximum memory size8 GB1.5 TB
Max memory channelsno data4
Maximum memory bandwidthno data68 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics 500no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom x5-E3940 and Xeon E5-4655 v4.

PCIe version2.03.0
PCI Express lanes440

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.

Atom x5-E3940 1.23
Xeon E5-4655 v4 6.87
+459%

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.

Atom x5-E3940 1953
Xeon E5-4655 v4 10912
+459%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.23 6.87
Recency 30 August 2014 20 June 2016
Physical cores 4 8
Threads 4 16
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 135 Watt

Atom x5-E3940 has 1250% lower power consumption.

Xeon E5-4655 v4, on the other hand, has a 458.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads.

The Xeon E5-4655 v4 is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom x5-E3940 in performance tests.

Be aware that Atom x5-E3940 is a notebook processor while Xeon E5-4655 v4 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Atom x5-E3940 and Xeon E5-4655 v4, 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 Atom x5-E3940
Atom x5-E3940
Intel Xeon E5-4655 v4
Xeon E5-4655 v4

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.


2.1 7 votes

Rate Atom x5-E3940 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.5 2 votes

Rate Xeon E5-4655 v4 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Atom x5-E3940 or Xeon E5-4655 v4, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.