Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) vs Xeon E5620

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon E5620
2010
4 cores / 8 threads, 80 Watt
2.26
+41.3%
Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W)
2009
4 cores / 4 threads, 125 Watt
1.60

Xeon E5620 outperforms Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) by a considerable 41% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E5620 and Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking18152090
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.08no data
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
Power efficiency2.671.21
Architecture codenameWestmere-EP (2010−2011)Deneb (2009−2011)
Release date16 March 2010 (14 years ago)7 November 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$35no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon E5620 and Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads84
Base clock speed2.4 GHz3.4 GHz
Boost clock speed2.66 GHz3.4 GHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)128 KB (per core)
L2 cache256 KB (per core)512 KB (per core)
L3 cache12 MB (shared)6 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm45 nm
Die size239 mm2258 mm2
Maximum core temperature78 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,170 million758 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E5620 and Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) 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
SocketFCLGA1366,LGA1366AM3
Power consumption (TDP)80 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5620 and Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W). You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2no data
AES-NI+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology1.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
Idle States+no data
Demand Based Switching+no data
PAE40 Bitno data

Security technologies

Xeon E5620 and Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) 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 E5620 and Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) 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 E5620 and Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W). Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size288 GBno data
Max memory channels3no data
Maximum memory bandwidth25.6 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 E5620 and Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W).

PCIe version2.02.0

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.

Xeon E5620 2.26
+41.3%
Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) 1.60

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 E5620 3592
+41.2%
Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) 2544

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.26 1.60
Recency 16 March 2010 7 November 2009
Threads 8 4
Chip lithography 32 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 80 Watt 125 Watt

Xeon E5620 has a 41.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 months, 100% more threads, a 40.6% more advanced lithography process, and 56.3% lower power consumption.

The Xeon E5620 is our recommended choice as it beats the Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon E5620 is a server/workstation processor while Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5620 and Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W), 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 E5620
Xeon E5620
AMD Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W)
Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W)

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.


3.2 127 votes

Rate Xeon E5620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 644 votes

Rate Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon E5620 or Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W), agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.