Xeon E7530 vs Ryzen 3 3300X
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 3 3300X outperforms Xeon E7530 by an impressive 86% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen 3 3300X and Xeon E7530 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 891 | 1297 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 30.95 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Power efficiency | 12.30 | 4.10 |
| Architecture codename | Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020) | no data |
| Release date | 24 April 2020 (4 years ago) | 1 January 2010 (14 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $120 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 3 3300X and Xeon E7530 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 cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 1.87 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.3 GHz | 2.13 GHz |
| L1 cache | 96K (per core) | no data |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | no data |
| L3 cache | 16 MB (shared) | 12 MB L3 Cache |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 74 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 64 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 95 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 3,800 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 3 3300X and Xeon E7530 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 configuration | 1 | no data |
| Socket | AM4 | FCLGA1567 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 105 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 3 3300X and Xeon E7530. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | 86x MMX(+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A,-64, AMD-V, AES, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, SHA, Precision Boost 2 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 1.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Security technologies
Ryzen 3 3300X and Xeon E7530 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 3 3300X and Xeon E7530 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 3 3300X and Xeon E7530. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-3200 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 3 3300X and Xeon E7530.
| PCIe version | 4.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | no 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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 8.77 | 4.72 |
| Recency | 24 April 2020 | 1 January 2010 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 6 |
| Threads | 8 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 105 Watt |
Ryzen 3 3300X has a 85.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 542.9% more advanced lithography process, and 61.5% lower power consumption.
Xeon E7530, on the other hand, has 50% more physical cores and 50% more threads.
The Ryzen 3 3300X is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E7530 in performance tests.
Note that Ryzen 3 3300X is a desktop processor while Xeon E7530 is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 3 3300X and Xeon E7530, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
