CPU Comparison

The AMD A10-9700 and Intel Xeon E5620 land in the same performance tier, with the AMD part holding a razor-thin edge across every benchmark recorded. The A10-9700's average benchmark score is 1034, while the Xeon E5620 sits at 1029, a difference of less than 0.5%. Both processors occupy the 28th percentile of all CPUs, meaning they are statistical peers in overall capability. The data shows a consistent but minimal victory for the A10-9700 in all five head-to-head tests, with deltas ranging from 0.3% to 0.6%. For a user deciding between these two, the choice comes down to platform features rather than raw compute performance, since neither chip can claim a meaningful advantage in rendering workloads.

The Verdict

The benchmark results point to a clear but narrow verdict: the AMD A10-9700 wins every single head-to-head comparison, yet the margins are so small that they would be imperceptible in real-world use. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the A10-9700 scores 302 against the Xeon E5620's 301, a 0.3% lead. The R20 multicore test shows 1261 versus 1255, a 0.5% gap. Single-core results follow the same pattern, with the A10-9700 ahead by 0.6% in R20 single-core (178 vs 177) and 0.5% in R23 single-core (424 vs 422). The largest absolute difference is in R23 multicore, where the AMD chip scores 3004 versus 2989, a 15-point margin. The Xeon E5620 never wins a single test, and its average score of 1029 places it just behind the A10-9700's 1034.

Who should pick which? The data suggests that a user prioritizing raw multi-threaded throughput for video encoding or 3D rendering would technically get slightly more from the A10-9700, but the advantage is under 1% in every case. Conversely, the Xeon E5620 offers ECC memory support and triple-channel DDR3, features absent from the AMD part. The A10-9700 also includes integrated Radeon R7 graphics, which the Xeon lacks entirely. The verdict is that neither chip offers a decisive performance win; the A10-9700 is the faster processor by a hair, while the Xeon E5620 brings server-oriented features that may matter more than the benchmark delta.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD A10-9700 wins in every benchmark category, but the nature of those wins is revealing. In multi-core tests, the A10-9700's advantage stems from its higher base clock of 3.50 GHz compared to the Xeon's 2.40 GHz. The boost clocks tell a similar story: 3.80 GHz for AMD versus 2.67 GHz for Intel. This clock advantage allows the A10-9700 to edge ahead despite having only 4 threads versus the Xeon's 8 threads. The Cinebench R15 multicore result (302 vs 301) shows that the Xeon's hyper-threading nearly compensates for its lower clock speeds, but not quite.

Single-core performance is where the AMD chip's clock speed pays off most clearly. The R20 single-core score of 178 versus 177, and the R23 single-core score of 424 versus 422, both favor the A10-9700. For tasks that rely on a single thread, legacy applications, some game engines, or lightly threaded productivity tools, the A10-9700 holds a consistent, if small, edge. The Xeon E5620's best showing is in R15 multicore, where it trails by just one point, suggesting that its 8 threads make it competitive in heavily parallel workloads despite the clock deficit.

The use-case split favors the A10-9700 for general desktop work and any task where clock speed matters more than thread count. The Xeon E5620, with its ECC support and triple-channel memory, would be the choice for a low-cost home server or workstation where data integrity and memory bandwidth are priorities over the sub-1% performance gap. The integrated Radeon R7 graphics in the AMD part also mean it can power a display without a discrete GPU, which the Xeon cannot do.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different eras and design philosophies. The AMD A10-9700 is built on the Excavator architecture, codenamed Bristol Ridge, using a 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 3,100 million transistors into a 250 mm² die. The Intel Xeon E5620 uses the Westmere architecture, specifically Westmere-EP, on a 32 nm process at Intel, with 1,170 million transistors on a 239 mm² die. The transistor count difference is stark, AMD uses nearly three times as many transistors, but the performance results are nearly identical, indicating that the Intel design is more efficient per transistor.

Cache configurations differ significantly. The A10-9700 has 320 KB of L1 and 2 MB of L2, with no L3 cache at all. The Xeon E5620 has 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, but crucially features 12 MB of shared L3 cache. This large L3 cache is a server-class feature that helps with repeated data access across threads, yet it does not translate into a benchmark win for the Intel part. The absence of L3 on the AMD chip is compensated by higher clock speeds and a newer memory interface.

Memory support is a major differentiator. The A10-9700 uses dual-channel DDR4 with a bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, while the Xeon E5620 uses triple-channel DDR3 and has no listed bandwidth figure. The AMD part's DDR4 support is newer and potentially faster, but the Xeon's triple-channel configuration can provide more total memory channels. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, which the A10-9700 does not. PCIe generations also differ: the AMD chip offers Gen 3 with 8 CPU lanes, while the Intel part is limited to Gen 2. The Xeon has no integrated graphics, whereas the A10-9700 includes Radeon R7 graphics.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD A10-9700 has an average benchmark score of 1034, compared to the Intel Xeon E5620's 1029, a difference of 5 points or roughly 0.5%.

Q: Does the Intel Xeon E5620 ever beat the AMD A10-9700 in any benchmark?

A: No. In the five head-to-head benchmarks recorded, the AMD A10-9700 wins all five, with the Xeon E5620 trailing by margins between 0.3% and 0.6%.

Q: What is the main advantage of the Intel Xeon E5620?

A: The Xeon E5620 supports ECC memory and uses a triple-channel DDR3 memory bus, features that are absent from the AMD A10-9700. It also has 12 MB of shared L3 cache versus no L3 cache on the AMD part.

Q: Why does the AMD A10-9700 win despite having fewer threads?

A: The A10-9700 has a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 3.80 GHz, while the Xeon E5620 runs at 2.40 GHz base and 2.67 GHz boost. This clock advantage offsets the Xeon's 8 threads versus the AMD's 4 threads.

Q: Which processor includes integrated graphics?

A: Only the AMD A10-9700 includes integrated Radeon R7 graphics. The Intel Xeon E5620 has no integrated graphics at all.

Q: Are these processors still in production?

A: No. Both are listed as end-of-life products. The AMD A10-9700 was released on July 26, 2017, while the Intel Xeon E5620 was released on March 15, 2010.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a remarkably consistent pattern: the AMD A10-9700 wins every test, but by margins that are almost below measurement noise. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the A10-9700 scores 302 against the Xeon's 301, a delta of 0.3%. This is the closest result in the entire comparison, with the two processors separated by a single point. The R20 multicore test widens the gap slightly to 0.5%, with scores of 1261 and 1255. Both results indicate that the Xeon's 8 threads nearly compensate for its lower clock speed, but not entirely.

Single-core benchmarks show a similar story. In R20 single-core, the A10-9700 scores 178 versus 177, a 0.6% delta, the largest percentage difference in any test. The R23 single-core result is 424 versus 422, a 0.5% gap. These margins are consistent with the clock speed differences: the AMD part's 3.80 GHz boost clock gives it a per-thread advantage that carries through all tests. The R23 multicore test produces the largest absolute score difference, with the A10-9700 at 3004 and the Xeon at 2989, a 15-point margin.

The head-to-head record is 5 wins for the AMD A10-9700 and 0 wins for the Intel Xeon E5620. However, the average benchmark scores tell a more nuanced story. The A10-9700's average of 1034 places it 0.1% below the AMD A10-7890K and 0.3% above the Intel Pentium G4560, which scores 1031. The Xeon E5620's average of 1029 places it 0.2% below the same Pentium G4560 and 0.2% above the Intel Core i7-5650U. Both chips sit in the 28th percentile of all CPUs, confirming that they are equivalent in overall performance ranking.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every specification category, yet deliver nearly identical performance. The AMD A10-9700 has 4 cores and 4 threads, while the Intel Xeon E5620 has 4 cores and 8 threads. Clock speeds favor AMD: 3.50 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost versus 2.40 GHz base and 2.67 GHz boost. Thermal design power differs, with the AMD part rated at 65 W and the Intel part at 80 W. The sockets are incompatible: AMD Socket AM4 for the A10-9700 and Intel Socket 1366 for the Xeon E5620.

The cache hierarchy is one of the most significant differences. The AMD A10-9700 has 320 KB of L1 and 2 MB of L2, with no L3 cache. The Intel Xeon E5620 has 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, plus 12 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support also diverges: the AMD part uses dual-channel DDR4 with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel part uses triple-channel DDR3 with no listed bandwidth. ECC memory is supported only on the Xeon E5620. PCIe capabilities differ as well, with the AMD part offering Gen 3 with 8 CPU lanes versus Gen 2 on the Intel part.

Manufacturing details separate the two further. The AMD A10-9700 is built on a 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries with 3,100 million transistors and a 250 mm² die. The Intel Xeon E5620 uses a 32 nm process at Intel with 1,170 million transistors and a 239 mm² die. The release dates are seven years apart: the AMD part launched on July 26, 2017, while the Intel part launched on March 15, 2010. The market segments differ, with the AMD A10-9700 targeting desktop use and the Xeon E5620 aimed at server/workstation applications. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, and both are end-of-life products.