Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-2667 v3 outperforms Phenom X4 9650 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Xeon E5-2667 v3 is 2356 days newer than Phenom X4 9650.
Advantages of AMD Phenom X4 9650
- Consumes up to 30% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-2667 v3 - 95 vs 135 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-2667 v3 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-2667 v3
- Performs up to 12% better in Minecraft than Phenom X4 9650 - 647 vs 578 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD Phenom X4 9650 - 8 vs 4 threads
Minecraft
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Phenom X4 9650
Desktop • Mar 27th, 2008
Xeon E5-2667 v3
Server/Workstation • Sep 8th, 2014
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD Phenom X4 9650 | vs | Intel Xeon E5-2667 v3 |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 27th, 2008 | Release Date | Sep 8th, 2014 |
| Phenom X4 | Collection | Xeon E5 |
| Agena | Codename | Gainestown, Haswell-E/EP, Ivy Bridge, Sandy Bridge-EP/EX |
| AMD Socket AM2+ | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Desktop | Segment | Server |
| 4 | Cores | 8 |
| 4 | Threads | 8 |
| 2.3 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.2 GHz |
| Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.6 GHz |
95 W | TDP | 135 W |
| 65 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
| 11.5x | Multiplier | 32.0x |
On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | No |
