Phenom II X6 1100T BE vs Xeon Gold 6230

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon Gold 6230
2019
20 cores / 40 threads, 125 Watt
17.69
+372%
Phenom II X6 1100T BE
2010
6 cores / 6 threads, 125 Watt
3.75

Xeon Gold 6230 outperforms Phenom II X6 1100T BE by a whopping 372% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon Gold 6230 and Phenom II X6 1100T BE processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking3751490
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation13.87no data
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Xeon Goldno data
Power efficiency12.902.74
Architecture codenameCascade Lake (2019−2020)Thuban (2010)
Release date2 April 2019 (5 years ago)7 December 2010 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,894no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon Gold 6230 and Phenom II X6 1100T BE 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 cores20 (Icosa-Core)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads406
Base clock speed2.1 GHz3.3 GHz
Boost clock speed3.9 GHz3.7 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier21no data
L1 cache1.25 MB128 KB (per core)
L2 cache20 MB512 KB (per core)
L3 cache27.5 MB6 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm45 nm
Die sizeno data346 mm2
Maximum core temperature87 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data904 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+-
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Xeon Gold 6230 and Phenom II X6 1100T BE 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 configuration4 (Multiprocessor)1
SocketFCLGA3647AM3
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon Gold 6230 and Phenom II X6 1100T BE. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512no data
AES-NI+-
AVX+-
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Speed Shift+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
TSX+-
Turbo Boost Max 3.0-no data
Deep Learning Boost+-

Security technologies

Xeon Gold 6230 and Phenom II X6 1100T BE 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 Gold 6230 and Phenom II X6 1100T BE 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 Gold 6230 and Phenom II X6 1100T BE. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2933DDR3
Maximum memory size1 TBno data
Max memory channels6no data
Maximum memory bandwidth140.8 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon Gold 6230 and Phenom II X6 1100T BE.

PCIe version3.02.0
PCI Express lanes48no 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 Gold 6230 17.69
+372%
Phenom II X6 1100T BE 3.75

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 Gold 6230 27069
+371%
Phenom II X6 1100T BE 5745

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 17.69 3.75
Recency 2 April 2019 7 December 2010
Physical cores 20 6
Threads 40 6
Chip lithography 14 nm 45 nm

Xeon Gold 6230 has a 371.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, 233.3% more physical cores and 566.7% more threads, and a 221.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Xeon Gold 6230 is our recommended choice as it beats the Phenom II X6 1100T BE in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon Gold 6230 is a server/workstation processor while Phenom II X6 1100T BE is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon Gold 6230 and Phenom II X6 1100T BE, 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 Gold 6230
Xeon Gold 6230
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T BE
Phenom II X6 1100T BE

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.


2.4 24 votes

Rate Xeon Gold 6230 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 457 votes

Rate Phenom II X6 1100T BE on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon Gold 6230 or Phenom II X6 1100T BE, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.