Xeon Silver 4310 vs Athlon II X2 240
Aggregate performance score
Xeon Silver 4310 outperforms Athlon II X2 240 by a whopping 2085% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Athlon II X2 240 and Xeon Silver 4310 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2635 | 459 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 3.28 | 19.60 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Architecture codename | Regor (2009−2013) | Ice Lake-SP (2021) |
| Release date | July 2009 (15 years ago) | 6 April 2021 (3 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $35 | no data |
| Current price | $25 (0.7x MSRP) | $1108 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Xeon Silver 4310 has 498% better value for money than Athlon II X2 240.
Detailed specifications
Athlon II X2 240 and Xeon Silver 4310 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 12 (Dodeca-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 24 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 3.3 GHz |
| L1 cache | 256 KB | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 18 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 10 nm |
| Die size | 117 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 82 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 82 °C |
| Number of transistors | 410 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon II X2 240 and Xeon Silver 4310 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 | 1 | 2 |
| Socket | AM3 | FCLGA4189 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 120 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon II X2 240 and Xeon Silver 4310. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512 |
| AES-NI | no data | + |
| AVX | no data | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| TSX | no data | + |
| Status | no data | Launched |
Security technologies
Athlon II X2 240 and Xeon Silver 4310 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® SPS |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon II X2 240 and Xeon Silver 4310 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon II X2 240 and Xeon Silver 4310. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR4-2667 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 6 TB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 8 |
| ECC memory support | no data | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon II X2 240 and Xeon Silver 4310.
| PCIe version | no data | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 64 |
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.
Xeon Silver 4310 outperforms Athlon II X2 240 by 2085% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Xeon Silver 4310 outperforms Athlon II X2 240 by 2090% in Passmark.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Xeon Silver 4310 outperforms Athlon II X2 240 by 307% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Xeon Silver 4310 outperforms Athlon II X2 240 by 1390% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.67 | 14.64 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 12 |
| Threads | 2 | 24 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 120 Watt |
The Xeon Silver 4310 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon II X2 240 in performance tests.
Note that Athlon II X2 240 is a desktop processor while Xeon Silver 4310 is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon II X2 240 and Xeon Silver 4310, 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.
