Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS
Front view of AMD FX 6100

AMD FX 6100

CPUBoss Winner

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Xeon L5420

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon L5420

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 12 MB vs 6 MB 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much more l2 cache per core 3 MB/core vs 1 MB/core 3x more l2 cache per core
Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 2 vs 1 Twice as many CPUs in SMP configuration
Much lower annual home energy cost 12.04 $/year vs 48.09 $/year 4x lower annual home energy cost
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 43.8 $/year vs 136.66 $/year 3.1x lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of AMD FX 6100

Reasons to consider the
AMD FX 6100

Report a correction
Much better performance per dollar 7.03 pt/$ vs 0.33 pt/$ More than 21x better performance per dollar
Significantly higher clock speed 3.3 GHz vs 2.5 GHz More than 30% higher clock speed
Much newer manufacturing process 32 nm vs 45 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
More cores 6 vs 4 2 more cores; run more applications at once
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.4 GHz vs 3.67 GHz More than 20% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Newer Oct, 2011 vs Mar, 2008 Release date over 3 years later
Better geekbench 3 single core score 1,798 vs 1,380 More than 30% better geekbench 3 single core score
Higher Maximum operating temperature 70 °C vs 57 °C Around 25% higher Maximum operating temperature
Better PassMark score 5,409 vs 3,506 Around 55% better PassMark score
More threads 6 vs 4 2 more threads
Better performance per watt 3.75 pt/W vs 2.75 pt/W More than 35% better performance per watt
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.72 GHz vs 3.85 GHz Around 25% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon L5420 vs FX 6100

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon L5420
4,968
FX 6100
6,990

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon L5420
1,380
FX 6100
1,798

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon L5420
107,200 MB/s
FX 6100
2,090,000 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon L5420
4,473
FX 6100
6,679

GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon L5420
5,037
FX 6100
7,818

GeekBench

Xeon L5420
5,037
FX 6100
8,368

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Xeon L5420
3,506
FX 6100
5,409

PassMark (Single Core)

Xeon L5420
1,043
FX 6100
1,184

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon L5420  vs
FX 6100 
Clock speed 2.5 GHz 3.3 GHz
Cores Quad core Hexa core
Socket type
LGA 771
AM3+

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
SSE2
F16C
MMX
XOP
AVX
SSE3
SSE
ABM
CLMUL
AMD64
SSE4.1
FMA4
SSE4.2
CVT16
AMD-V
Supplemental SSE3
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 50W 95W
Annual home energy cost 12.04 $/year 48.09 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 43.8 $/year 136.66 $/year
Performance per watt 2.75 pt/W 3.75 pt/W
Typical power consumption 40.63W N/A

bus

Architecture FSB HyperTransport 3.1
Number of links 1 1
Clock speed 1,333 MHz 2,600 MHz

details

Xeon L5420  vs
FX 6100 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 6
L2 cache 12 MB 6 MB
L2 cache per core 3 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 45 nm 32 nm
Transistor count 820,000,000 1,200,000,000
Max CPUs 2 1
Voltage range 0.85 - 1.35V 1.21 - 1.35V
Operating temperature Unknown - 57°C Unknown - 70°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 3.67 GHz 4.4 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.85 GHz 4.72 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.67 GHz 4.4 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU None None
Label N/A N/A
Latest DirectX N/A N/A
Number of displays supported N/A N/A
GPU clock speed N/A N/A
Turbo clock speed N/A N/A
3DMark06 N/A N/A
Intel Xeon L5420
Report a correction
AMD FX 6100
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus