Pentium N3520 vs Xeon 6741P

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon 6741P
2025, $4,421
48 cores / 96 threads, 300 Watt
57.49
+8745%

Xeon 6741P outperforms Pentium N3520 by a whopping 8745% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking343022
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation11.440.04
Market segmentServerLaptop
Seriesno dataIntel Pentium
Power efficiency8.093.66
DesignerIntelIntel
ManufacturerIntelno data
Architecture codenameGranite Rapids (2024−2026)Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
Release date24 February 2025 (less than a year ago)1 December 2013 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$4,421$161

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon 6741P has 28500% better value for money than Pentium N3520.

Performance to price scatter graph

Detailed specifications

Xeon 6741P and Pentium N3520 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 cores48 (Octatetraconta-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads964
Base clock speed2.5 GHz2.17 GHz
Boost clock speed3.8 GHz2.42 GHz
L1 cache112 KB (per core)224 KB
L2 cache2 MB (per core)2 MB
L3 cache288 MB (shared)2 MB
Chip lithographyIntel 3 nm22 nm
Die size2x 598 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)79 °Cno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibilityno data-

Compatibility

Information on Xeon 6741P and Pentium N3520 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
SocketFCLGA4710FCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)300 Watt7.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon 6741P and Pentium N3520. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AMX, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512no data
AES-NI+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shift+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0-
Hyper-Threading Technology+-
TSX+-
Idle Statesno data+
Smart Connectno data+
RSTno data-
Deep Learning Boost+-

Security technologies

Xeon 6741P and Pentium N3520 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB++
SGX+no data
OS Guard+no data
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon 6741P and Pentium N3520 are enumerated here.

VT-d+-
VT-x++
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon 6741P and Pentium N3520. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR5(6400MT/s)DDR3L-1333
Maximum memory size4 TB8 GB
Max memory channels82
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardN/AIntel HD Graphics for Intel Atom Processor Z3700 Series
Graphics max frequencyno data854 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Xeon 6741P and Pentium N3520 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon 6741P and Pentium N3520.

PCIe version5.02.0
PCI Express lanes1364
USB revisionno data3.0 and 2.0
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data5

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.

Xeon 6741P 57.49
+8745%
Pentium N3520 0.65

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.

Xeon 6741P 100660
+8699%
Samples: 1
Pentium N3520 1144
Samples: 277

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 57.49 0.65
Recency 24 February 2025 1 December 2013
Physical cores 48 4
Threads 96 4
Power consumption (TDP) 300 Watt 7 Watt

Xeon 6741P has a 8744.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, and 1100% more physical cores and 2300% more threads.

Pentium N3520, on the other hand, has 4185.7% lower power consumption.

The Intel Xeon 6741P is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Pentium N3520 in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon 6741P is a server/workstation processor while Pentium N3520 is a notebook one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Xeon 6741P
Xeon 6741P
Intel Pentium N3520
Pentium N3520

Other comparisons

We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Xeon 6741P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 93 votes

Rate Pentium N3520 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about processors Xeon 6741P and Pentium N3520, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report bugs or inaccuracies on the site.