Xeon E-2468 vs Athlon 3000G

VS

Aggregate performance score

Athlon 3000G
2019
2 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
2.82
Xeon E-2468
2023
8 cores / 16 threads, 65 Watt
16.51
+485%

Xeon E-2468 outperforms Athlon 3000G by a whopping 485% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Athlon 3000G and Xeon E-2468 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1670394
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.2793.06
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
SeriesAMD Athlonno data
Power efficiency7.6324.04
Architecture codenameZen+ (2018−2019)Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)
Release date21 November 2019 (5 years ago)14 December 2023 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$49$426

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon E-2468 has 1666% better value for money than Athlon 3000G.

Detailed specifications

Athlon 3000G and Xeon E-2468 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 cores2 (Dual-core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads416
Base clock speed3.5 GHz2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed3.5 GHz5.2 GHz
Bus typePCIe 3.0no data
Bus rateno data16 GT/s
Multiplier35no data
L1 cache96K (per core)80 KB (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)2 MB (per core)
L3 cache4 MB (shared)24 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nmIntel 7 nm
Die size209.78 mm2?257 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Number of transistors4,800 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Athlon 3000G and Xeon E-2468 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketAM4FCLGA1700
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 3000G and Xeon E-2468. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI++
AVX++
PowerNow+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data+
Precision Boost 2+no data

Security technologies

Athlon 3000G and Xeon E-2468 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon 3000G and Xeon E-2468 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 3000G and Xeon E-2468. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Dual-channelDDR5-4800
Maximum memory size64 GB?128 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidth42.671 GB/sno data
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon RX Vega 3N/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon 3000G and Xeon E-2468.

PCIe version3.05
PCI Express lanes616

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.

Athlon 3000G 2.82
Xeon E-2468 16.51
+485%

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.

Athlon 3000G 4484
Xeon E-2468 26221
+485%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.82 16.51
Recency 21 November 2019 14 December 2023
Physical cores 2 8
Threads 4 16
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 65 Watt

Athlon 3000G has 85.7% lower power consumption.

Xeon E-2468, on the other hand, has a 485.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads.

The Xeon E-2468 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon 3000G in performance tests.

Note that Athlon 3000G is a desktop processor while Xeon E-2468 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 3000G and Xeon E-2468, 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.


AMD Athlon 3000G
Athlon 3000G
Intel Xeon E-2468
Xeon E-2468

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 2093 votes

Rate Athlon 3000G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Xeon E-2468 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon 3000G or Xeon E-2468, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.