Processor 300T vs Xeon X7350
Primary details
Comparing Xeon X7350 and Processor 300T processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1240 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Power efficiency | 3.59 | no data |
| Architecture codename | no data | Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) |
| Release date | 1 July 2007 (17 years ago) | 8 January 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $82 |
Detailed specifications
Xeon X7350 and Processor 300T 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 | no data | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | no data | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 2.93 GHz | 3.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 3.4 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 1.25 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 8 MB L2 Cache | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 10 nm |
| Die size | no data | 163 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 66 °C | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
| VID voltage range | 1V-1.5V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon X7350 and Processor 300T 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 | PGA604,PPGA604 | 1700 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 130 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon X7350 and Processor 300T. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| TSX | - | + |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Demand Based Switching | + | no data |
| FSB parity | + | no data |
Security technologies
Xeon X7350 and Processor 300T technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | + |
| EDB | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon X7350 and Processor 300T are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon X7350 and Processor 300T. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4, DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel UHD Graphics 710 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon X7350 and Processor 300T.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 16 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 July 2007 | 8 January 2024 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 130 Watt | 35 Watt |
Processor 300T has an age advantage of 16 years, a 550% more advanced lithography process, and 271.4% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Xeon X7350 and Processor 300T. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Xeon X7350 is a server/workstation processor while Processor 300T is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon X7350 and Processor 300T, 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.
