Ryzen Threadripper 1920 vs Xeon X5670
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen Threadripper 1920 outperforms Xeon X5670 by a whopping 262% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Xeon X5670 and Ryzen Threadripper 1920 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1371 | 475 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.06 | 17.61 |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Series | Xeon (Desktop) | no data |
| Architecture codename | Westmere-EP (2010−2011) | Zen (2017−2020) |
| Release date | 16 March 2010 (14 years ago) | 29 July 2017 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $67 | no data |
| Current price | $45 (0.7x MSRP) | $270 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Ryzen Threadripper 1920 has 1561% better value for money than Xeon X5670.
Detailed specifications
Xeon X5670 and Ryzen Threadripper 1920 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 | 6 (Hexa-Core) | 12 (Dodeca-Core) |
| Threads | 12 | 24 |
| Base clock speed | 2.93 GHz | 3.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.33 GHz | 3.8 GHz |
| Bus support | 6400 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 96K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 12 MB (shared) | 32 MB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 239 mm2 | 213 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 81 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,170 million | 9,600 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | Yes |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon X5670 and Ryzen Threadripper 1920 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 | SP3r2 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 140 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon X5670 and Ryzen Threadripper 1920. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.2 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 1.0 | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | + | no data |
| PAE | 40 Bit | no data |
| Status | Discontinued | no data |
Security technologies
Xeon X5670 and Ryzen Threadripper 1920 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 X5670 and Ryzen Threadripper 1920 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | no data | + |
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon X5670 and Ryzen Threadripper 1920. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR4 Quad-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 | + | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon X5670 and Ryzen Threadripper 1920.
| 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.
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.
Ryzen Threadripper 1920 outperforms Xeon X5670 by 262% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Ryzen Threadripper 1920 outperforms Xeon X5670 by 262% in Passmark.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.94 | 14.27 |
| Recency | 16 March 2010 | 29 July 2017 |
| Physical cores | 6 | 12 |
| Threads | 12 | 24 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 140 Watt |
The Ryzen Threadripper 1920 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon X5670 in performance tests.
Be aware that Xeon X5670 is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen Threadripper 1920 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon X5670 and Ryzen Threadripper 1920, 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.
