Xeon E7-4870 vs Athlon II X4 651
Primary details
Comparing Athlon II X4 651 and Xeon E7-4870 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1815 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Series | no data | Intel Xeon E7 |
| Power efficiency | 2.13 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Llano (2011−2012) | Westmere (2010−2011) |
| Release date | 14 November 2011 (13 years ago) | 5 April 2011 (13 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $4,394 |
Detailed specifications
Athlon II X4 651 and Xeon E7-4870 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 10 (Deca-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 20 |
| Base clock speed | 3 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3 GHz | 2.8 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | QPI |
| Bus rate | no data | 6.4 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 18 |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 640 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2.56 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 30 MB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 228 mm2 | 513 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 69 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | 2600 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon II X4 651 and Xeon E7-4870 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 | 4 (Multiprocessor) |
| Socket | FM1 | LGA1567 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 130 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon II X4 651 and Xeon E7-4870. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2 |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 1.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
Security technologies
Athlon II X4 651 and Xeon E7-4870 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon II X4 651 and Xeon E7-4870 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| 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 X4 651 and Xeon E7-4870. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3-800, DDR3-978, DDR3-1066, DDR3-1333, Speed-1066 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 2 TB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 4 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 34.113 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 14 November 2011 | 5 April 2011 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 10 |
| Threads | 4 | 20 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 130 Watt |
Athlon II X4 651 has an age advantage of 7 months, and 30% lower power consumption.
Xeon E7-4870, on the other hand, has 150% more physical cores and 400% more threads.
We couldn't decide between Athlon II X4 651 and Xeon E7-4870. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Athlon II X4 651 is a desktop processor while Xeon E7-4870 is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon II X4 651 and Xeon E7-4870, 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.
