Ryzen 7 9700X vs Xeon E5-2680

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon E5-2680
2012
8 cores / 16 threads, 130 Watt
6.14
Ryzen 7 9700X
2024
8 cores / 16 threads, 65 Watt
24.43
+298%

Ryzen 7 9700X outperforms Xeon E5-2680 by a whopping 298% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E5-2680 and Ryzen 7 9700X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1093215
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.8251.42
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
SeriesXeon (Desktop)no data
Power efficiency4.3134.27
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge-EP (2012)Granite Ridge (2024)
Release date6 March 2012 (12 years ago)8 August 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,723$359

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen 7 9700X has 6171% better value for money than Xeon E5-2680.

Detailed specifications

Xeon E5-2680 and Ryzen 7 9700X 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)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads1616
Base clock speed2.7 GHz3.8 GHz
Boost clock speed3.5 GHz5.5 GHz
Bus rate8 GT/sno data
L1 cache64K (per core)80 KB (per core)
L2 cache256K (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache20 MB (shared)32 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm4 nm
Die size435 mm270.6 mm2
Maximum core temperature85 °C95 °C
Number of transistors2,270 million8,315 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E5-2680 and Ryzen 7 9700X 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
SocketFCLGA2011AM5
Power consumption (TDP)130 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-2680 and Ryzen 7 9700X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVXSMT, AES, AVX, AVX2, AVX512, FMA3, MMX (+), SHA, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A
AES-NI++
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access-no data
Demand Based Switching+no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Xeon E5-2680 and Ryzen 7 9700X 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 E5-2680 and Ryzen 7 9700X are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-2680 and Ryzen 7 9700X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR5
Maximum memory size384 GBno data
Max memory channels4no data
Maximum memory bandwidth51.2 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon Graphics

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-2680 and Ryzen 7 9700X.

PCIe version3.05.0
PCI Express lanes4024

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 E5-2680 6.14
Ryzen 7 9700X 24.43
+298%

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 E5-2680 9399
Ryzen 7 9700X 37386
+298%

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Xeon E5-2680 4118
Ryzen 7 9700X 9457
+130%

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Xeon E5-2680 26801
Ryzen 7 9700X 57914
+116%

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Xeon E5-2680 7924
Ryzen 7 9700X 18794
+137%

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Xeon E5-2680 4.87
Ryzen 7 9700X 2.36
+106%

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Xeon E5-2680 12
Ryzen 7 9700X 36
+203%

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Xeon E5-2680 1.26
Ryzen 7 9700X 4.06
+222%

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Xeon E5-2680 0.3
Ryzen 7 9700X 16.1
+4635%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.14 24.43
Recency 6 March 2012 8 August 2024
Chip lithography 32 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 130 Watt 65 Watt

Ryzen 7 9700X has a 297.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 700% more advanced lithography process, and 100% lower power consumption.

The Ryzen 7 9700X is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E5-2680 in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon E5-2680 is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen 7 9700X is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-2680 and Ryzen 7 9700X, 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 E5-2680
Xeon E5-2680
AMD Ryzen 7 9700X
Ryzen 7 9700X

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.


4.2 122 votes

Rate Xeon E5-2680 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 186 votes

Rate Ryzen 7 9700X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon E5-2680 or Ryzen 7 9700X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.