AMD Athlon X4 840 vs Intel Xeon W5590 Comparison

Intel Xeon W5590 and AMD Athlon X4 840 are both end-of-life processors from different eras and market segments, yet their benchmark results show a surprisingly tight contest. The Xeon, a 2009 server/workstation part, and the Athlon, a 2014 desktop chip, land within 1.1% of each other in average benchmark score. The data shows the Xeon W5590 winning all five head-to-head Cinebench tests, but by margins so small they are almost negligible in real-world use.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon W5590 wins every recorded benchmark comparison, but the victories are narrow. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Xeon scores 288 against the Athlon's 285, a 1.1% difference. Moving to Cinebench R20 multicore, the gap widens slightly to 1.3%, with scores of 1204 and 1189 respectively. The single-core tests show even tighter margins: a 0.6% lead in R20 single-core (169 vs 168) and a 1% lead in R23 single-core (404 vs 400).

The Athlon X4 840 does not win any of the five head-to-head tests. However, its strengths appear outside the benchmark suite. The Athlon has a 65W TDP compared to the Xeon's 130W, making it far more efficient per watt. It also features a higher boost clock at 3.80 GHz versus 3.60 GHz, and it supports PCIe Gen 3 while the Xeon is limited to Gen 2. For workloads that rely on newer platform features or power efficiency, the Athlon holds practical advantages despite losing every Cinebench comparison.

The percentiles tell a similar story. The Xeon sits at the 27th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the Athlon sits at the 26th. Both are entry-level performers by modern standards, but the Xeon's average benchmark score of 986 edges out the Athlon's 975 by about 1.1%.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two chips is substantial. The Xeon W5590 uses Intel's Nehalem architecture, codenamed Gainestown, built on a 45 nm process with 731 million transistors on a 263 mm² die. The Athlon X4 840 uses AMD's Steamroller architecture, codenamed Kaveri, built on a 28 nm process with 2,411 million transistors on a 245 mm² die. The node advantage is clear: 28 nm versus 45 nm means the Athlon packs more than three times the transistor count into a slightly smaller die.

Cache configurations differ significantly. The Xeon offers 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, plus 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The Athlon provides 256 KB of L1 and 4 MB of L2, with no L3 cache at all. The Xeon's larger L3 cache helps in multi-threaded workloads that reuse data, while the Athlon's bigger L1 and L2 per-core caches may benefit latency-sensitive single-threaded tasks.

Memory support also diverges. The Xeon uses triple-channel DDR3 with 32.0 GB/s theoretical bandwidth, while the Athlon uses dual-channel DDR3 with 34.1 GB/s. Despite fewer channels, the Athlon's higher bandwidth stems from its newer memory controller. The Xeon supports ECC memory; the Athlon does not. The Xeon's socket is Intel Socket 1366, the Athlon uses AMD Socket FM2+. The Athlon has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking; the Xeon is locked.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: Both have 4 physical cores. The Xeon W5590 supports 8 threads via Hyper-Threading, while the Athlon X4 840 has 4 threads total.

Q: How much faster is the Xeon in multi-core workloads?

A: The Xeon leads by 1.1% in Cinebench R15 multicore, 1.3% in R20 multicore, and 1.2% in R23 multicore. These are the largest margins in the entire head-to-head comparison.

Q: Does the Athlon have any architectural advantage?

A: Yes, the Athlon uses a 28 nm process versus 45 nm, has a higher boost clock (3.80 GHz vs 3.60 GHz), supports PCIe Gen 3, and draws 65W versus 130W.

Q: Can the Xeon be overclocked?

A: No, the Xeon W5590 has a locked multiplier. The Athlon X4 840 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Only the Xeon W5590 supports ECC memory. The Athlon X4 840 does not.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Xeon has an average benchmark score of 986, placing it at the 27th percentile. The Athlon scores 975, placing it at the 26th percentile.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification except core count and memory type. Here is the full breakdown:

• Threads: Xeon W5590 has 8 threads, Athlon X4 840 has 4 threads.
• Base clock: Xeon is 3.33 GHz, Athlon is 3.10 GHz.
• Boost clock: Xeon is 3.60 GHz, Athlon is 3.80 GHz.
• TDP: Xeon is 130W, Athlon is 65W.
• Socket: Xeon uses Intel Socket 1366, Athlon uses AMD Socket FM2+.
• Architecture: Xeon is Nehalem (Gainestown), Athlon is Steamroller (Kaveri).
• Process node: Xeon is 45 nm, Athlon is 28 nm.
• Foundry: Xeon is Intel, Athlon is GlobalFoundries.
• Transistors: Xeon has 731 million, Athlon has 2,411 million.
• Die size: Xeon is 263 mm², Athlon is 245 mm².
• L1 cache: Xeon has 64 KB per core, Athlon has 256 KB total.
• L2 cache: Xeon has 256 KB per core, Athlon has 4 MB total.
• L3 cache: Xeon has 8 MB shared, Athlon has none.
• Memory bus: Xeon is triple-channel, Athlon is dual-channel.
• Memory bandwidth: Xeon is 32.0 GB/s, Athlon is 34.1 GB/s.
• ECC support: Xeon supports ECC, Athlon does not.
• PCIe: Xeon is Gen 2, Athlon is Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only).
• Integrated graphics: Neither has integrated graphics.
• Market segment: Xeon is Server/Workstation, Athlon is Desktop.
• Release date: Xeon released in 2009, Athlon in 2014.
• Launch MSRP: Xeon was $1600, Athlon has no recorded launch MSRP.
• Multiplier unlocked: Xeon is locked, Athlon is unlocked.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a consistent but marginal victory for the Intel Xeon W5590 across all five Cinebench tests. The largest delta is in Cinebench R20 multicore, where the Xeon scores 1204 versus the Athlon's 1189, a 1.3% advantage. This test benefits from the Xeon's extra threads and shared L3 cache, which help in heavily multi-threaded rendering workloads.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Xeon wins 288 to 285, a 1.1% lead. The pattern repeats in R23 multicore: 2867 versus 2833, a 1.2% margin. These multicore results suggest that the Xeon's 8 threads provide a small but repeatable edge over the Athlon's 4 threads in Cinebench's scaling scenarios.

Single-core results are even closer. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the Xeon scores 169 against 168, a 0.6% lead. In R23 single-core, it is 404 versus 400, a 1% margin. The Athlon's higher boost clock (3.80 GHz vs 3.60 GHz) nearly compensates for the Xeon's older architecture in per-thread performance, but it still falls slightly behind.

The average benchmark scores reinforce these findings. The Xeon's 986 average sits just 1.1% above the Athlon's 975. In the nearest rival comparisons, the Xeon matches the Intel Core i7-875K and Core i3-4130T within 0.2%, while the Athlon ties the Core i3-4130 and A10-7870K exactly. Both processors occupy the same performance tier, despite their different origins.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear but nuanced conclusion. For raw multi-threaded performance in Cinebench, the Intel Xeon W5590 is the winner by every recorded metric, but the margins are under 1.5% in all cases. This makes the difference effectively imperceptible in daily use. If the workload is rendering or heavily threaded, the Xeon's 8 threads give it a theoretical advantage that the benchmarks confirm.

The AMD Athlon X4 840 is the better choice for efficiency and modern platform features. It draws less than half the power (65W vs 130W), supports PCIe Gen 3, has a higher boost clock, and uses a much newer 28 nm process. It also has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking, which can offset the small benchmark deficit. The Athlon's launch MSRP was not recorded, but the Xeon's was $1600, reflecting its workstation positioning.

For a builder focused purely on Cinebench scores, the Xeon W5590 wins all five head-to-head tests. For a builder prioritizing power consumption, platform modernity, or overclocking, the Athlon X4 840 is the practical pick despite losing the benchmarks. Neither processor is competitive by modern standards, sitting at the 26th and 27th percentiles, but within this pair, the choice depends on whether the 1.1% average benchmark advantage or the 65W TDP difference matters more. The Xeon offers marginal performance; the Athlon offers efficiency and flexibility.