Ryzen 5 240 vs Xeon X7350
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 5 240 outperforms Xeon X7350 by a whopping 192% 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 | 1512 | 673 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.13 | no data |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Power efficiency | 1.45 | 12.28 |
| Designer | Intel | AMD |
| Manufacturer | Intel | TSMC |
| Architecture codename | Tigerton (2007) | Hawk Point (2024−2025) |
| Release date | 6 September 2007 (18 years ago) | 6 January 2025 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $2,301 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Xeon X7350 and Ryzen 5 240 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 | 6 (Hexa-Core) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 6 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | 2.93 GHz | 4.3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 0.93 GHz | 5 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 4 MB (per die) | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 8 MB L2 Cache | 16 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 4 nm |
| Die size | 2x 143 mm2 | 178 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 64 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 582 million | 25,000 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
| VID voltage range | 1V-1.5V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon X7350 and Ryzen 5 240 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 | 4 | 1 |
| Socket | PGA604,PPGA604 | FP8 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 130 Watt | 45 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon X7350 and Ryzen 5 240. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Ryzen AI, AES, AVX, AVX2, AVX512, FMA3, MMX (+), SHA, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A, SSSE3 |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| 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 |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Security technologies
Xeon X7350 and Ryzen 5 240 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 X7350 and Ryzen 5 240 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon X7350 and Ryzen 5 240. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR2, DDR3 | DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | AMD Radeon 760M |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon X7350 and Ryzen 5 240.
| PCIe version | no data | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 20 |
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 4.48 | 13.10 |
| Recency | 6 September 2007 | 6 January 2025 |
| Threads | 6 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 130 Watt | 45 Watt |
Ryzen 5 240 has a 192% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 17 years, 100% more threads, a 1525% more advanced lithography process, and 189% lower power consumption.
The AMD Ryzen 5 240 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Xeon X7350 in performance tests.
Be aware that Xeon X7350 is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen 5 240 is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
