Phenom II X4 B95 vs Xeon X3370
Aggregate performance score
Xeon X3370 outperforms Phenom II X4 B95 by a minimal 4% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2383 | 2422 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 2.60 |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Power efficiency | 0.64 | 0.62 |
| Designer | Intel | AMD |
| Manufacturer | no data | GlobalFoundries |
| Architecture codename | no data | Deneb (2009−2011) |
| Release date | 1 July 2008 (17 years ago) | 1 October 2009 (16 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $80 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Xeon X3370 and Phenom II X4 B95 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 | 3 GHz | 3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 3 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 128 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 12 MB L2 Cache | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | no data | 258 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 71 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 758 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | 0.85V-1.3625V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon X3370 and Phenom II X4 B95 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 | LGA775 | AM3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 95 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon X3370 and Phenom II X4 B95. 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 |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| FSB parity | - | no data |
Security technologies
Xeon X3370 and Phenom II X4 B95 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 X3370 and Phenom II X4 B95 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon X3370 and Phenom II X4 B95. 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 | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon X3370 and Phenom II X4 B95.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.44 | 1.38 |
| Recency | 1 July 2008 | 1 October 2009 |
Xeon X3370 has a 4.3% higher aggregate performance score.
Phenom II X4 B95, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Intel Xeon X3370 and AMD Phenom II X4 B95.
Be aware that Xeon X3370 is a server/workstation processor while Phenom II X4 B95 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
