Ryzen 5 2600X vs Xeon 3.20
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 5 2600X outperforms Xeon 3.20 by a whopping 2815% 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 | 3400 | 1082 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 5.53 |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Series | no data | AMD Ryzen 5 |
| Power efficiency | 0.30 | 8.89 |
| Designer | Intel | AMD |
| Manufacturer | no data | GlobalFoundries |
| Architecture codename | Gallatin (2003−2004) | Zen+ (2018−2019) |
| Release date | October 2003 (22 years ago) | 13 April 2018 (7 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $229 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Xeon 3.20 and Ryzen 5 2600X 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 | 1 (Single-Core) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.2 GHz | 4.2 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 36 |
| L1 cache | 8 KB | 576 KB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | 3 MB |
| L3 cache | 2 MB | 16 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 12 nm |
| Die size | 237 mm2 | 213 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 286 million | 4800 Million |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon 3.20 and Ryzen 5 2600X 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 | 2 | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | 604 | AM4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 97 Watt | 95 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon 3.20 and Ryzen 5 2600X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | SSE4.2, SSE4A, AMD-V, AES, AVX2, FMA3, SHA |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon 3.20 and Ryzen 5 2600X are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon 3.20 and Ryzen 5 2600X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4 Dual-channel |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 46.933 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon 3.20 and Ryzen 5 2600X.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 20 |
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 | 0.27 | 7.87 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 6 |
| Threads | 1 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 97 Watt | 95 Watt |
Ryzen 5 2600X has a 2814.8% higher aggregate performance score, 500% more physical cores and 1100% more threads, a 983.3% more advanced lithography process, and 2.1% lower power consumption.
The AMD Ryzen 5 2600X is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Xeon 3.20 in performance tests.
Be aware that Xeon 3.20 is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen 5 2600X is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
