E-240 vs Xeon X5667
Primary details
Comparing Xeon X5667 and E-240 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1646 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.61 | no data |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Series | no data | AMD E-Series |
| Power efficiency | 2.92 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Westmere-EP (2010−2011) | Zacate (2011−2013) |
| Release date | 16 March 2010 (14 years ago) | 4 January 2011 (13 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $80 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Xeon X5667 and E-240 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 3.06 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 3.46 GHz | 1.5 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 64 KB |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 12 MB (shared) | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 40 nm |
| Die size | 239 mm2 | 75 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 83 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,170 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon X5667 and E-240 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 | 2 | 1 |
| Socket | FCLGA1366,LGA1366 | FT1 BGA 413-Ball |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 18 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon X5667 and E-240. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.2 | MMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-V |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 1.0 | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | + | no data |
| PAE | 40 Bit | no data |
Security technologies
Xeon X5667 and E-240 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 X5667 and E-240 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon X5667 and E-240. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 Single-channel |
| Maximum memory size | 288 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 3 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 32 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon HD 6310 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon X5667 and E-240.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | no 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.
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.
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
| Recency | 16 March 2010 | 4 January 2011 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 1 |
| Threads | 8 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 18 Watt |
Xeon X5667 has 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 25% more advanced lithography process.
E-240, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 9 months, and 427.8% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Xeon X5667 and E-240. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Xeon X5667 is a server/workstation processor while E-240 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon X5667 and E-240, 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.
