Phenom II X6 1035T vs Xeon E5-2640 v3

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon E5-2640 v3
2014
8 cores / 16 threads, 90 Watt
7.00
+270%
Phenom II X6 1035T
2010
6 cores / 6 threads, 95 Watt
1.89

Xeon E5-2640 v3 outperforms Phenom II X6 1035T by a whopping 270% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E5-2640 v3 and Phenom II X6 1035T processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking10091981
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.23
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
Power efficiency7.361.88
Architecture codenameHaswell-EP (2014−2015)Thuban (2010)
Release date8 September 2014 (10 years ago)27 April 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$189

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon E5-2640 v3 and Phenom II X6 1035T 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)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads166
Base clock speed2.6 GHz2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed3.4 GHz3.1 GHz
Bus rate8 GT/sno data
L1 cache64K (per core)128 KB (per core)
L2 cache256K (per core)512 KB (per core)
L3 cache20 MB (shared)6 MB (shared)
Chip lithography22 nm45 nm
Die size356 mm2346 mm2
Maximum core temperature74 °Cno data
Number of transistors2,600 million904 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E5-2640 v3 and Phenom II X6 1035T 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 configuration21
SocketFCLGA2011AM3
Power consumption (TDP)90 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-2640 v3 and Phenom II X6 1035T. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVX2no data
AES-NI+-
AVX+-
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access-no data
Demand Based Switching+no data
PAE46 Bitno data

Security technologies

Xeon E5-2640 v3 and Phenom II X6 1035T technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data
Secure Key+no data
OS Guard+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-2640 v3 and Phenom II X6 1035T are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-2640 v3 and Phenom II X6 1035T. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-1600, DDR4-1866DDR3
Maximum memory size768 GBno data
Max memory channels4no data
Maximum memory bandwidth59 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-2640 v3 and Phenom II X6 1035T.

PCIe version3.02.0
PCI Express lanes40no data

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 E5-2640 v3 7.00
+270%
Phenom II X6 1035T 1.89

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.

Xeon E5-2640 v3 11120
+271%
Phenom II X6 1035T 3001

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.00 1.89
Recency 8 September 2014 27 April 2010
Physical cores 8 6
Threads 16 6
Chip lithography 22 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 90 Watt 95 Watt

Xeon E5-2640 v3 has a 270.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, 33.3% more physical cores and 166.7% more threads, a 104.5% more advanced lithography process, and 5.6% lower power consumption.

The Xeon E5-2640 v3 is our recommended choice as it beats the Phenom II X6 1035T in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon E5-2640 v3 is a server/workstation processor while Phenom II X6 1035T is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-2640 v3 and Phenom II X6 1035T, 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.


Intel Xeon E5-2640 v3
Xeon E5-2640 v3
AMD Phenom II X6 1035T
Phenom II X6 1035T

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.


4.3 2757 votes

Rate Xeon E5-2640 v3 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 110 votes

Rate Phenom II X6 1035T on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon E5-2640 v3 or Phenom II X6 1035T, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.