Apple M1 vs Xeon W3520

Aggregate performance score

Xeon W3520
2009
4 cores / 8 threads, 130 Watt
1.91

Apple M1 outperforms Xeon W3520 by a whopping 181% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon W3520 and Apple M1 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking19851190
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.27no data
Market segmentServerLaptop
Seriesno dataApple Apple M-Series
Power efficiency1.34no data
Architecture codenameBloomfield (2008−2010)no data
Release date30 March 2009 (15 years ago)10 November 2020 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$404no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon W3520 and Apple M1 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads88
Base clock speed2.66 GHz2.064 GHz
Boost clock speed2.93 GHz3.2 GHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)2 MB
L2 cache256 KB (per core)16 MB
L3 cache8 MB (shared)16 MB
Chip lithography45 nm5 nm
Die size263 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature68 °Cno data
Number of transistors731 million16000 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Xeon W3520 and Apple M1 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 configuration1no data
SocketFCLGA1366no data
Power consumption (TDP)130 Wattno data

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon W3520 and Apple M1. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology1.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
Idle States+no data
Demand Based Switching+no data
PAE36 Bitno data

Security technologies

Xeon W3520 and Apple M1 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 W3520 and Apple M1 are enumerated here.

VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon W3520 and Apple M1. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3no data
Maximum memory size24 GBno data
Max memory channels3no data
Maximum memory bandwidth25.6 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardN/AApple M1 8-Core GPU

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon W3520 and Apple M1.

PCIe version2.0no 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 W3520 1.91
Apple M1 5.36
+181%

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 W3520 2924
Apple M1 8207
+181%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.91 5.36
Recency 30 March 2009 10 November 2020
Physical cores 4 8
Chip lithography 45 nm 5 nm

Apple M1 has a 180.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, 100% more physical cores, and a 800% more advanced lithography process.

The Apple M1 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon W3520 in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon W3520 is a server/workstation processor while Apple M1 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon W3520 and Apple M1, 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 W3520
Xeon W3520
Apple M1
M1

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.


4.3 120 votes

Rate Xeon W3520 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 2212 votes

Rate Apple M1 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon W3520 or Apple M1, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.