Ryzen 5 8400F vs Xeon E6540
Primary details
Comparing Xeon E6540 and Ryzen 5 8400F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 462 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 59.75 |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Power efficiency | no data | 21.99 |
| Architecture codename | no data | Phoenix (2023−2024) |
| Release date | 1 January 2010 (14 years ago) | 1 April 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $170 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Xeon E6540 and Ryzen 5 8400F 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 | 6 (Hexa-Core) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 12 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | 2 GHz | 4.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.27 GHz | 4.7 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 18 MB L3 Cache | 16 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 4 nm |
| Die size | no data | 178 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | no data | 25,000 million |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon E6540 and Ryzen 5 8400F 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 | no data | 1 |
| Socket | FCLGA1567 | AM5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 105 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E6540 and Ryzen 5 8400F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 1.0 | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Security technologies
Xeon E6540 and Ryzen 5 8400F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E6540 and Ryzen 5 8400F are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-x | + | no data |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E6540 and Ryzen 5 8400F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E6540 and Ryzen 5 8400F.
| PCIe version | no data | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 20 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 January 2010 | 1 April 2024 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 105 Watt | 65 Watt |
Ryzen 5 8400F has an age advantage of 14 years, a 1025% more advanced lithography process, and 61.5% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Xeon E6540 and Ryzen 5 8400F. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Xeon E6540 is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen 5 8400F is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E6540 and Ryzen 5 8400F, 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.
