Xeon X3320 vs FX-4350

VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-4350
2013
4 cores / 4 threads, 125 Watt
2.17
+66.9%

FX-4350 outperforms Xeon X3320 by an impressive 67% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-4350 and Xeon X3320 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking18752293
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Power efficiency1.581.25
Architecture codenameVishera (2012−2015)no data
Release date29 April 2013 (11 years ago)1 January 2008 (16 years ago)

Detailed specifications

FX-4350 and Xeon X3320 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)no data
Threads4no data
Base clock speed4.2 GHz2.5 GHz
Boost clock speed4.3 GHzno data
L2 cache4096 KBno data
L3 cacheno data6 MB L2 Cache
Chip lithography32 nm45 nm
Die size315 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature61 °C71 °C
Number of transistors1,200 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier+-
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.275 V - Max: 1.4 Vno data
VID voltage rangeno data0.85V-1.3625V

Compatibility

Information on FX-4350 and Xeon X3320 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 configuration1no data
SocketAM3+LGA775
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-4350 and Xeon X3320. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

FX-4350 and Xeon X3320 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-4350 and Xeon X3320 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-4350 and Xeon X3320. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-4350 and Xeon X3320.

PCIe versionn/ano data

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.

FX-4350 2.17
+66.9%
Xeon X3320 1.30

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.

FX-4350 3314
+66.9%
Xeon X3320 1986

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.17 1.30
Recency 29 April 2013 1 January 2008
Chip lithography 32 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 95 Watt

FX-4350 has a 66.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 40.6% more advanced lithography process.

Xeon X3320, on the other hand, has 31.6% lower power consumption.

The FX-4350 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon X3320 in performance tests.

Note that FX-4350 is a desktop processor while Xeon X3320 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-4350 and Xeon X3320, 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 FX-4350
FX-4350
Intel Xeon X3320
Xeon X3320

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.


3.8 546 votes

Rate FX-4350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 9 votes

Rate Xeon X3320 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-4350 or Xeon X3320, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.