Opteron 3320 EE vs Xeon X6550
Aggregate performance score
Xeon X6550 outperforms Opteron 3320 EE by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Xeon X6550 and Opteron 3320 EE processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2338 | 2342 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Power efficiency | 0.89 | 4.58 |
| Architecture codename | no data | Delhi (2012−2013) |
| Release date | 1 January 2010 (14 years ago) | 4 December 2012 (12 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Xeon X6550 and Opteron 3320 EE 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 | 8 (Octa-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 16 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 2 GHz | 1.9 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 2.5 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 192 KB |
| L2 cache | no data | 4096 KB |
| L3 cache | 18 MB L3 Cache | 8192 KB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | no data | 315 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 69 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 1,200 million |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon X6550 and Opteron 3320 EE 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 | AM3+ |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 130 Watt | 25 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon X6550 and Opteron 3320 EE. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| FMA | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 1.0 | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
Security technologies
Xeon X6550 and Opteron 3320 EE technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon X6550 and Opteron 3320 EE 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 X6550 and Opteron 3320 EE. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR3 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon X6550 and Opteron 3320 EE.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
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.
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 | 1.22 | 1.21 |
| Recency | 1 January 2010 | 4 December 2012 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 4 |
| Threads | 16 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 130 Watt | 25 Watt |
Xeon X6550 has a 0.8% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads.
Opteron 3320 EE, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 40.6% more advanced lithography process, and 420% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Xeon X6550 and Opteron 3320 EE.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon X6550 and Opteron 3320 EE, 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.
