Steam Deck OLED APU vs Xeon X7560
Aggregate performance score
Xeon X7560 outperforms Steam Deck OLED APU by a moderate 11% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Xeon X7560 and Steam Deck OLED APU processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
Place in the ranking | 1200 | 1284 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Market segment | Server | Laptop |
Series | no data | Renoir (Ryzen 4000 APU) |
Power efficiency | 3.72 | 29.06 |
Architecture codename | no data | Van Gogh (Custom) (2023) |
Release date | 1 January 2010 (14 years ago) | 9 November 2023 (less than a year ago) |
Detailed specifications
Xeon X7560 and Steam Deck OLED APU 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 | 8 (Octa-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
Threads | 16 | 8 |
Base clock speed | 2.27 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
Boost clock speed | 2.67 GHz | 3.5 GHz |
L1 cache | no data | 256 KB |
L2 cache | no data | 2 MB |
L3 cache | 24 MB L3 Cache | 4 MB |
Chip lithography | 45 nm | 6 nm |
64 bit support | - | + |
Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon X7560 and Steam Deck OLED APU 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.
Socket | FCBGA1567,FCLGA1567 | no data |
Power consumption (TDP) | 130 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon X7560 and Steam Deck OLED APU. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
Instruction set extensions | no data | MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME |
AES-NI | - | + |
FMA | - | + |
AVX | - | + |
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
Turbo Boost Technology | 1.0 | no data |
Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
Security technologies
Xeon X7560 and Steam Deck OLED APU technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
EDB | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon X7560 and Steam Deck OLED APU are enumerated here.
VT-x | + | no data |
EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon X7560 and Steam Deck OLED APU. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
Supported memory types | DDR3-800, DDR3-978, DDR3-1066, DDR3-1333, Speed-1066 | DDR4 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon Steam Deck 8CU |
Pros & cons summary
Performance score | 5.30 | 4.78 |
Recency | 1 January 2010 | 9 November 2023 |
Physical cores | 8 | 4 |
Threads | 16 | 8 |
Chip lithography | 45 nm | 6 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 130 Watt | 15 Watt |
Xeon X7560 has a 10.9% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
Steam Deck OLED APU, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 13 years, a 650% more advanced lithography process, and 766.7% lower power consumption.
The Xeon X7560 is our recommended choice as it beats the Steam Deck OLED APU in performance tests.
Be aware that Xeon X7560 is a server/workstation processor while Steam Deck OLED APU is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon X7560 and Steam Deck OLED APU, 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.