Xeon E-2314 vs Phenom X4 9500
Aggregate performance score
Xeon E-2314 outperforms Phenom X4 9500 by a whopping 427% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Phenom X4 9500 and Xeon E-2314 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2373 | 1118 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 5.34 | 30.80 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Architecture codename | Agena (2007−2008) | Rocket Lake-E (2021) |
| Release date | November 2007 (16 years ago) | 8 September 2021 (2 years ago) |
| Current price | $26 | $217 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Xeon E-2314 has 477% better value for money than Phenom X4 9500.
Detailed specifications
Phenom X4 9500 and Xeon E-2314 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) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.8 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.2 GHz | 4.5 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 2 MB (shared) | 8 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 285 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 72 °C |
| Number of transistors | 450 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | Yes |
Compatibility
Information on Phenom X4 9500 and Xeon E-2314 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 | 1 |
| Socket | AM2+ | FCLGA1200 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom X4 9500 and Xeon E-2314. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512 |
| AES-NI | no data | + |
| AVX | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| TSX | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | no data | + |
| Status | no data | Launched |
Security technologies
Phenom X4 9500 and Xeon E-2314 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| MPX | no data | + |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® SPS |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom X4 9500 and Xeon E-2314 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | no data |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom X4 9500 and Xeon E-2314. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4-3200 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 128 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| ECC memory support | no data | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Phenom X4 9500 and Xeon E-2314.
| PCIe version | no data | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 20 |
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 E-2314 outperforms Phenom X4 9500 by 427% 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 E-2314 outperforms Phenom X4 9500 by 426% 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 E-2314 outperforms Phenom X4 9500 by 745% 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 E-2314 outperforms Phenom X4 9500 by 527% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.00 | 5.27 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 65 Watt |
The Xeon E-2314 is our recommended choice as it beats the Phenom X4 9500 in performance tests.
Note that Phenom X4 9500 is a desktop processor while Xeon E-2314 is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom X4 9500 and Xeon E-2314, 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.
