A8-3870K vs Xeon E5440
Aggregate performance score
Xeon E5440 outperforms A8-3870K by a minimal 3% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Xeon E5440 and A8-3870K processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2036 | 2065 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.38 | 3.20 |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Architecture codename | no data | Llano (2011−2012) |
| Release date | 1 January 2008 (16 years ago) | 20 December 2011 (12 years ago) |
| Current price | $90 | $32 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
A8-3870K has 742% better value for money than Xeon E5440.
Detailed specifications
Xeon E5440 and A8-3870K 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 | no data | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | no data | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 2.83 GHz | 3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 3 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 128 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 12 MB L2 Cache | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | no data | 228 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 67 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 1,178 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | Yes |
| VID voltage range | 0.85V-1.35V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon E5440 and A8-3870K 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 | no data | 1 |
| Socket | LGA771 | FM1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 80 Watt | 100 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5440 and A8-3870K. 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 | + | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | + | no data |
| FSB parity | + | no data |
| Status | Discontinued | no data |
Security technologies
Xeon E5440 and A8-3870K 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 E5440 and A8-3870K are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | no data | + |
| VT-x | + | no data |
| EPT | - | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5440 and A8-3870K. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD 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 E5440 outperforms A8-3870K by 3% 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 E5440 outperforms A8-3870K by 3% in Passmark.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.53 | 1.49 |
| Recency | 1 January 2008 | 20 December 2011 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 80 Watt | 100 Watt |
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Xeon E5440 and A8-3870K.
Be aware that Xeon E5440 is a server/workstation processor while A8-3870K is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5440 and A8-3870K, 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.
