Xeon w7-2575X vs FX-8370E

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-8370E
2014
8 cores / 8 threads, 95 Watt
3.34
Xeon w7-2575X
2024
22 cores / 44 threads, 250 Watt
38.66
+1057%

Xeon w7-2575X outperforms FX-8370E by a whopping 1057% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-8370E and Xeon w7-2575X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking158374
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.7069.51
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Power efficiency3.3114.56
Architecture codenameVishera (2012−2015)Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024)
Release date2 September 2014 (10 years ago)24 August 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199$1,689

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon w7-2575X has 9830% better value for money than FX-8370E.

Detailed specifications

FX-8370E and Xeon w7-2575X 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)22 (Docosa-Core)
Threads844
Base clock speed3.3 GHz3 GHz
Boost clock speed4.3 GHz4.8 GHz
L1 cacheno data80 KB (per core)
L2 cache8192 KB2 MB (per core)
L3 cacheno data45 MB
Chip lithography32 nmIntel 7 nm
Die size315 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature71 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data76 °C
Number of transistors1,200 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplier++
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.075 V - Max: 1.2875 Vno data

Compatibility

Information on FX-8370E and Xeon w7-2575X 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 configuration11
SocketAM3+FCLGA4677
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt250 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-8370E and Xeon w7-2575X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® AMX, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512
AES-NI++
FMA+-
AVX++
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+
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

FX-8370E and Xeon w7-2575X technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
SGXno data-
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-8370E and Xeon w7-2575X 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 FX-8370E and Xeon w7-2575X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR5-4800
Maximum memory sizeno data2 TB
Max memory channelsno data4
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)N/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-8370E and Xeon w7-2575X.

PCIe versionn/a5.0
PCI Express lanesno data64

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.

FX-8370E 3.34
Xeon w7-2575X 38.66
+1057%

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.

FX-8370E 5306
Xeon w7-2575X 61402
+1057%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.34 38.66
Recency 2 September 2014 24 August 2024
Physical cores 8 22
Threads 8 44
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 250 Watt

FX-8370E has 163.2% lower power consumption.

Xeon w7-2575X, on the other hand, has a 1057.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, and 175% more physical cores and 450% more threads.

The Xeon w7-2575X is our recommended choice as it beats the FX-8370E in performance tests.

Note that FX-8370E is a desktop processor while Xeon w7-2575X is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-8370E and Xeon w7-2575X, 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 FX-8370E
FX-8370E
Intel Xeon w7-2575X
Xeon w7-2575X

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 87 votes

Rate FX-8370E on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Xeon w7-2575X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-8370E or Xeon w7-2575X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.