Athlon Silver 3050e vs Xeon X3350

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon X3350
2008
95 Watt
1.42
Athlon Silver 3050e
2020
2 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
1.85
+30.3%

Athlon Silver 3050e outperforms Xeon X3350 by a substantial 30% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon X3350 and Athlon Silver 3050e processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking21881986
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentServerLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD Raven Ridge (Ryzen 2000 APU)
Power efficiency1.4129.18
Architecture codenameno dataDali (Zen) (2020)
Release date1 January 2008 (16 years ago)1 June 2020 (4 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Xeon X3350 and Athlon Silver 3050e 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 data2 (Dual-core)
Threadsno data4
Base clock speed2.66 GHz1.4 GHz
Boost clock speedno data2.8 GHz
L1 cacheno data192 KB
L2 cacheno data1 MB
L3 cache12 MB L2 Cache4 MB
Chip lithography45 nm14 nm
Maximum core temperature71 °Cno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
VID voltage range0.85V-1.3625Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Xeon X3350 and Athlon Silver 3050e 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.

SocketLGA775FP5
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon X3350 and Athlon Silver 3050e. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME
AES-NI-+
FMA-+
AVX-+
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 X3350 and Athlon Silver 3050e 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 X3350 and Athlon Silver 3050e are enumerated here.

VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon X3350 and Athlon Silver 3050e. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR4

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon RX Vega 3

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 X3350 1.42
Athlon Silver 3050e 1.85
+30.3%

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 X3350 2263
Athlon Silver 3050e 2939
+29.9%

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 X3350 401
Athlon Silver 3050e 713
+77.8%

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 X3350 1253
Athlon Silver 3050e 1364
+8.9%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.42 1.85
Recency 1 January 2008 1 June 2020
Chip lithography 45 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 6 Watt

Athlon Silver 3050e has a 30.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 1483.3% lower power consumption.

The Athlon Silver 3050e is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon X3350 in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon X3350 is a server/workstation processor while Athlon Silver 3050e is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon X3350 and Athlon Silver 3050e, 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 X3350
Xeon X3350
AMD Athlon Silver 3050e
Athlon Silver 3050e

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.


4.2 6 votes

Rate Xeon X3350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.1 371 vote

Rate Athlon Silver 3050e on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon X3350 or Athlon Silver 3050e, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.