Xeon Platinum 8160 vs Athlon II M300

VS

Aggregate performance score

Athlon II M300
2009
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.42
Xeon Platinum 8160
2017
24 cores / 48 threads, 150 Watt
18.15
+4221%

Xeon Platinum 8160 outperforms Athlon II M300 by a whopping 4221% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Athlon II M300 and Xeon Platinum 8160 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2984336
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data3.41
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesAMD Athlon IIIntel Xeon Platinum
Power efficiency1.1411.45
Architecture codenameCaspian (2009)Skylake (server) (2017−2018)
Release date10 September 2009 (15 years ago)25 April 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$4,702

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Athlon II M300 and Xeon Platinum 8160 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)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Threads248
Base clock speedno data2.1 GHz
Boost clock speed2 GHz3.7 GHz
Bus rate3200 MHzno data
Multiplierno data21
L1 cache128 KB1.5 MB
L2 cache1 MB24 MB
L3 cacheno data33 MB
Chip lithography45 nm14 nm
Maximum core temperatureno data85 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Athlon II M300 and Xeon Platinum 8160 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 configurationno data8 (Multiprocessor)
SocketSocket S1 (S1g3)FCLGA3647
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt150 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon II M300 and Xeon Platinum 8160. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, Enhanced 3DNow!, NX bit, AMD64, PowerNow!, AMD VirtualizationIntel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
PowerNow+-
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2.0
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
TSX-+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data-

Security technologies

Athlon II M300 and Xeon Platinum 8160 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon II M300 and Xeon Platinum 8160 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon II M300 and Xeon Platinum 8160. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR2DDR4-2666
Maximum memory sizeno data768 GB
Max memory channelsno data6
Maximum memory bandwidthno data128.001 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon II M300 and Xeon Platinum 8160.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data48

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 II M300 0.42
Xeon Platinum 8160 18.15
+4221%

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 II M300 670
Xeon Platinum 8160 28825
+4202%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.42 18.15
Recency 10 September 2009 25 April 2017
Physical cores 2 24
Threads 2 48
Chip lithography 45 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 150 Watt

Athlon II M300 has 328.6% lower power consumption.

Xeon Platinum 8160, on the other hand, has a 4221.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, 1100% more physical cores and 2300% more threads, and a 221.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Xeon Platinum 8160 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon II M300 in performance tests.

Be aware that Athlon II M300 is a notebook processor while Xeon Platinum 8160 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon II M300 and Xeon Platinum 8160, 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 II M300
Athlon II M300
Intel Xeon Platinum 8160
Xeon Platinum 8160

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.


3.6 60 votes

Rate Athlon II M300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 39 votes

Rate Xeon Platinum 8160 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon II M300 or Xeon Platinum 8160, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.