Xeon E5620 vs FX-9590

VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-9590
2013
8 cores / 8 threads, 220 Watt
6.66
+183%

FX-9590 outperforms Xeon E5620 by a whopping 183% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-9590 and Xeon E5620 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking10441809
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.08
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Power efficiency2.762.68
Architecture codenameVishera (2012−2015)Westmere-EP (2010−2011)
Release date6 July 2013 (11 years ago)16 March 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$35

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

FX-9590 and Xeon E5620 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads88
Base clock speed4.7 GHz2.4 GHz
Boost clock speed5 GHz2.66 GHz
L1 cacheno data64 KB (per core)
L2 cache8192 KB256 KB (per core)
L3 cacheno data12 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm32 nm
Die size315 mm2239 mm2
Maximum core temperature57 °C78 °C
Number of transistors1,200 million1,170 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier+-
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.375 V - Max: 1.5375 Vno data

Compatibility

Information on FX-9590 and Xeon E5620 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
SocketAM3+FCLGA1366,LGA1366
Power consumption (TDP)220 Watt80 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-9590 and Xeon E5620. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.2
AES-NI++
FMA+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data1.0
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
Idle Statesno data+
Demand Based Switchingno data+
PAEno data40 Bit

Security technologies

FX-9590 and Xeon E5620 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-9590 and Xeon E5620 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-9590 and Xeon E5620. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data288 GB
Max memory channelsno data3
Maximum memory bandwidthno data25.6 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-9590 and Xeon E5620.

PCIe versionn/a2.0

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-9590 6.66
+183%
Xeon E5620 2.35

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-9590 10194
+184%
Xeon E5620 3590

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

FX-9590 530
+44.4%
Xeon E5620 367

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

FX-9590 2146
+46.2%
Xeon E5620 1468

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.66 2.35
Recency 6 July 2013 16 March 2010
Physical cores 8 4
Power consumption (TDP) 220 Watt 80 Watt

FX-9590 has a 183.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and 100% more physical cores.

Xeon E5620, on the other hand, has 175% lower power consumption.

The FX-9590 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E5620 in performance tests.

Note that FX-9590 is a desktop processor while Xeon E5620 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-9590 and Xeon E5620, 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-9590
FX-9590
Intel Xeon E5620
Xeon E5620

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.


4.3 933 votes

Rate FX-9590 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 109 votes

Rate Xeon E5620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-9590 or Xeon E5620, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.