Athlon 64 X2 3600+ vs Xeon E5-2620

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon E5-2620
2012
6 cores / 12 threads, 95 Watt
3.33
+733%
Athlon 64 X2 3600+
2005
2 cores / 2 threads, 89 Watt
0.40

Xeon E5-2620 outperforms Athlon 64 X2 3600+ by a whopping 733% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E5-2620 and Athlon 64 X2 3600+ processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking15863008
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.73no data
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
Power efficiency3.320.43
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge-EP (2012)Manchester (2005−2006)
Release date6 March 2012 (12 years ago)31 May 2005 (19 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$36no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon E5-2620 and Athlon 64 X2 3600+ 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 cores6 (Hexa-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads122
Base clock speed2 GHzno data
Boost clock speed2.5 GHz2 GHz
Bus rate7.2 GT/sno data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)128 KB (per core)
L2 cache256 KB (per core)256 KB (per core)
L3 cache15360 KB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm90 nm
Die size435 mm2156 mm2
Maximum core temperature77 °Cno data
Number of transistors2,270 million154 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E5-2620 and Athlon 64 X2 3600+ 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 configuration21
SocketFCLGA2011939
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt89 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-2620 and Athlon 64 X2 3600+. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVXno data
AES-NI+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology1.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access-no data
Demand Based Switching+no data

Security technologies

Xeon E5-2620 and Athlon 64 X2 3600+ technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-2620 and Athlon 64 X2 3600+ are enumerated here.

VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-2620 and Athlon 64 X2 3600+. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR1
Maximum memory size384 GBno data
Max memory channels4no data
Maximum memory bandwidth42.6 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-2620 and Athlon 64 X2 3600+.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes40no 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.

Xeon E5-2620 3.33
+733%
Athlon 64 X2 3600+ 0.40

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.

Xeon E5-2620 5293
+736%
Athlon 64 X2 3600+ 633

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.33 0.40
Recency 6 March 2012 31 May 2005
Physical cores 6 2
Threads 12 2
Chip lithography 32 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 89 Watt

Xeon E5-2620 has a 732.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, 200% more physical cores and 500% more threads, and a 181.3% more advanced lithography process.

Athlon 64 X2 3600+, on the other hand, has 6.7% lower power consumption.

The Xeon E5-2620 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon 64 X2 3600+ in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon E5-2620 is a server/workstation processor while Athlon 64 X2 3600+ is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-2620 and Athlon 64 X2 3600+, 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 Xeon E5-2620
Xeon E5-2620
AMD Athlon 64 X2 3600+
Athlon 64 X2 3600+

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.


4 517 votes

Rate Xeon E5-2620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 80 votes

Rate Athlon 64 X2 3600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon E5-2620 or Athlon 64 X2 3600+, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.