Xeon 3.20 vs Phenom II X4 905e
Aggregate performance score
Phenom II X4 905e outperforms Xeon 3.20 by a whopping 326% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2623 | 3432 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.09 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Series | 4x Phenom II (Desktop) | no data |
| Power efficiency | 0.75 | 0.12 |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Manufacturer | GlobalFoundries | no data |
| Architecture codename | Deneb (2009−2011) | Gallatin (2003−2004) |
| Release date | 2 June 2009 (16 years ago) | October 2003 (22 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $212 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Phenom II X4 905e and Xeon 3.20 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) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 2.5 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 2.5 GHz | 3.2 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 8 KB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 6 MB (shared) | 2 MB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 130 nm |
| Die size | 258 mm2 | 237 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 758 million | 286 million |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Phenom II X4 905e and Xeon 3.20 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 | 604 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 97 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom II X4 905e and Xeon 3.20. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | 45 nm, 1.25 | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom II X4 905e and Xeon 3.20 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom II X4 905e and Xeon 3.20. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Phenom II X4 905e and Xeon 3.20.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | no data |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.15 | 0.27 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 1 |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 130 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 97 Watt |
Phenom II X4 905e has a 326% higher aggregate performance score, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, a 189% more advanced lithography process, and 49% lower power consumption.
The AMD Phenom II X4 905e is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Xeon 3.20 in performance tests.
Note that Phenom II X4 905e is a desktop processor while Xeon 3.20 is a server/workstation one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
