Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-2650 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 E5-2650 v3 is 2356 days newer than Phenom X4 9650.
Advantages of AMD Phenom X4 9650
- Consumes up to 10% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3 - 95 vs 105 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3
- Performs up to 7% better in Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Phenom X4 9650 - 175 vs 164 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD Phenom X4 9650 - 20 vs 4 threads
Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Phenom X4 9650
Desktop • Mar 27th, 2008
Xeon E5-2650 v3
Server/Workstation • Sep 8th, 2014
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD Phenom X4 9650 | vs | Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3 |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 27th, 2008 | Release Date | Sep 8th, 2014 |
| Phenom X4 | Collection | Xeon E5 |
| Agena | Codename | Haswell |
| AMD Socket AM2+ | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Desktop | Segment | Server |
| 4 | Cores | 10 |
| 4 | Threads | 20 |
| 2.3 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.3 GHz |
| Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.0 GHz |
95 W | TDP | 105 W |
| 65 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
| 11.5x | Multiplier | 23.0x |
On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | No |
