A8-3800 vs Xeon E5405

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon E5405
2007
80 Watt
1.12

A8-3800 outperforms Xeon E5405 by a significant 20% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E5405 and A8-3800 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking24012268
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
Power efficiency1.281.88
Architecture codenameno dataLlano (2011−2012)
Release date1 October 2007 (17 years ago)30 June 2011 (13 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Xeon E5405 and A8-3800 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 coresno data4 (Quad-Core)
Threadsno data4
Base clock speed2 GHz2.4 GHz
Boost clock speedno data2.7 GHz
L1 cacheno data128 KB (per core)
L2 cacheno data1 MB (per core)
L3 cache12 MB L2 Cache0 KB
Chip lithography45 nm32 nm
Die sizeno data228 mm2
Maximum core temperature67 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range0.85V-1.35Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E5405 and A8-3800 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 configurationno data1
SocketLGA771FM1
Power consumption (TDP)80 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5405 and A8-3800. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)-no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States-no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Demand Based Switching-no data
FSB parity+no data

Security technologies

Xeon E5405 and A8-3800 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5405 and A8-3800 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-x+no data
EPT-no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5405 and A8-3800. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon HD 6550D

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 E5405 1.12
A8-3800 1.34
+19.6%

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 E5405 1718
A8-3800 2049
+19.3%

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.

Xeon E5405 302
+3.8%
A8-3800 291

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.

Xeon E5405 1050
+18.1%
A8-3800 889

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.12 1.34
Recency 1 October 2007 30 June 2011
Chip lithography 45 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 80 Watt 65 Watt

A8-3800 has a 19.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 40.6% more advanced lithography process, and 23.1% lower power consumption.

The A8-3800 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E5405 in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon E5405 is a server/workstation processor while A8-3800 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5405 and A8-3800, 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 E5405
Xeon E5405
AMD A8-3800
A8-3800

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.


3.6 31 vote

Rate Xeon E5405 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 69 votes

Rate A8-3800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon E5405 or A8-3800, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.