Xeon W-3323 vs E2-3800

VS

Aggregate performance score

E2-3800
2013
4 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
0.73
Xeon W-3323
2021
12 cores / 24 threads, 220 Watt
16.29
+2132%

Xeon W-3323 outperforms E2-3800 by a whopping 2132% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing E2-3800 and Xeon W-3323 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2677403
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesAMD A-Seriesno data
Power efficiency4.617.01
Architecture codenameKabini (2013−2014)Ice Lake-W (2021)
Release date23 May 2013 (11 years ago)29 July 2021 (3 years ago)

Detailed specifications

E2-3800 and Xeon W-3323 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)12 (Dodeca-Core)
Threads424
Base clock speedno data3.5 GHz
Boost clock speed1.3 GHz3.9 GHz
Bus rateno data8 GT/s
L1 cache128 KB64K (per core)
L2 cache2048 KB1 MB (per core)
L3 cacheno data18 MB (shared)
Chip lithography28 nm10 nm
Die size107 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)90 °C84 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on E2-3800 and Xeon W-3323 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 configuration12
SocketFT3FCLGA4189
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt220 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by E2-3800 and Xeon W-3323. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVXIntel® AVX-512
AES-NI++
FMAFMA4-
AVX++
PowerNow+-
PowerGating+-
VirusProtect+-
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

E2-3800 and Xeon W-3323 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
SGXno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by E2-3800 and Xeon W-3323 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+
IOMMU 2.0+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by E2-3800 and Xeon W-3323. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-1600DDR4-3200
Maximum memory sizeno data4 TB
Max memory channels18
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon HD 8280no data
Number of pipelines128no data
Enduro+-
Switchable graphics+-
UVD+-
VCE+-

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of E2-3800 and Xeon W-3323 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by E2-3800 and Xeon W-3323 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by E2-3800 and Xeon W-3323.

PCIe version2.04
PCI Express lanes464

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.

E2-3800 0.73
Xeon W-3323 16.29
+2132%

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.

E2-3800 1152
Xeon W-3323 25875
+2146%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.73 16.29
Recency 23 May 2013 29 July 2021
Physical cores 4 12
Threads 4 24
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 220 Watt

E2-3800 has 1366.7% lower power consumption.

Xeon W-3323, on the other hand, has a 2131.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, 200% more physical cores and 500% more threads, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

The Xeon W-3323 is our recommended choice as it beats the E2-3800 in performance tests.

Be aware that E2-3800 is a notebook processor while Xeon W-3323 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between E2-3800 and Xeon W-3323, 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 E2-3800
E2-3800
Intel Xeon W-3323
Xeon W-3323

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.


3.2 104 votes

Rate E2-3800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 21 vote

Rate Xeon W-3323 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about E2-3800 or Xeon W-3323, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.