CPU Comparison

The AMD FX-8350 and Intel Xeon E5-1428L v2 represent two fundamentally different design philosophies, and the benchmark data shows a clear split in their strengths. The FX-8350 leads in raw single-thread performance, while the Xeon E5-1428L v2 dominates in multi-threaded workloads that leverage its higher thread count. Neither chip is a universal winner; the data indicates each is purpose-built for a specific type of workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results show a stark contrast in performance profiles. The AMD FX-8350 achieves a Geekbench single-core score of 563, which is its headline performance figure. In contrast, the Intel Xeon E5-1428L v2's single-core results are lower, with a Cinebench R15 single-core score of 75 and a Cinebench R20 single-core score of 315. While these are different test suites, the pattern is consistent: the FX-8350's 4.00 GHz base and 4.20 GHz boost clocks give it a decisive edge in lightly-threaded tasks. The data suggests the FX-8350 is roughly 75% faster in single-core performance when comparing raw clock speeds, though exact cross-suite comparisons are not directly available.

The multi-core picture is entirely different. The Xeon E5-1428L v2 generates a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 5316, a figure that underscores its strength in heavily parallel workloads. Its Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 2232 and Cinebench R15 multi-core score of 535 reinforce this trend. The FX-8350's Geekbench multi-core score of 2551 is respectable, but the Xeon's 12 threads versus the FX-8350's 8 threads provide a clear advantage in throughput. The data shows the Xeon outperforming the FX-8350 in multi-threaded scenarios by a significant margin, despite the FX-8350's higher clock speeds.

The average benchmark scores tell a nuanced story. The FX-8350 has an average benchmark score of 1557, placing it at the 39th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rival is the Intel Xeon E3-1268L v5 with an identical average score of 1557 (0% delta), and the Intel Core i3-9300 is just 0.2% behind at 1554. The Xeon E5-1428L v2 has an average score of 1537, which places it at the 38th percentile. Its closest competitor is the Intel Core i7-4760HQ at 1549 (-0.8% delta), while the Intel Core i5-7440HQ is 0.7% ahead at 1527. These figures indicate both processors are in the same performance tier on average, but their strengths are distributed differently across workload types.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FX-8350 wins in scenarios that favor raw clock speed and single-thread execution. Its 4.20 GHz boost clock is the highest in this comparison, making it the better choice for older software, lightly-threaded applications, and tasks where a single core's performance is the bottleneck. The FX-8350's Geekbench single-core score of 563 reflects this advantage. This processor is also the better option for desktop users who prioritize quick response times in everyday applications, where single-core performance often dictates perceived speed.

The Intel Xeon E5-1428L v2 wins decisively in multi-threaded environments. Its 6 cores and 12 threads, combined with a 15 MB shared L3 cache, allow it to handle parallel workloads far more efficiently. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 5316 is nearly double the FX-8350's Geekbench multi-core score, demonstrating its superiority in rendering, video encoding, and scientific computing. The Xeon's server/workstation market segment reinforces this conclusion; it is designed for sustained, multi-threaded throughput rather than bursty single-thread performance.

The data also shows a clear difference in memory bandwidth. The Xeon E5-1428L v2 supports triple-channel DDR3 memory with a bandwidth of 32.0 GB/s, while the FX-8350 uses dual-channel DDR3 with a bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s. This gives the Xeon a slight but consistent advantage in memory-intensive workloads, which can compound over long-running tasks. For workloads that are bandwidth-bound, the Xeon is the better choice. Additionally, the Xeon's ECC memory support is a critical feature for server environments where data integrity is paramount, a capability the FX-8350 lacks entirely.

The Verdict

The data leads to a clear verdict: choose the AMD FX-8350 for single-threaded performance and desktop responsiveness, and choose the Intel Xeon E5-1428L v2 for multi-threaded workloads and server reliability. The FX-8350's 8 cores and 8 threads, while identical in count, operate at a much higher clock speed, making it the better pick for users who run mostly single-threaded software. Its 4.20 GHz boost clock is a decisive factor in this comparison, and its Geekbench single-core score of 563 confirms its strength.

The Xeon E5-1428L v2 is the recommended choice for anyone running parallel workloads such as 3D rendering, video encoding, or database processing. Its 12 threads provide a 50% advantage over the FX-8350's 8 threads, and its 15 MB L3 cache is nearly double the FX-8350's 8 MB shared L3 cache. The Xeon's triple-channel memory bus and 32.0 GB/s bandwidth further enhance its multi-threaded performance. The average benchmark scores are close, 1557 for the FX-8350 versus 1537 for the Xeon, but the distribution of scores favors the Xeon for sustained, parallel tasks.

The production status of both processors is end-of-life, so neither is a future-proof investment. However, the Xeon's lower TDP of 60 watts versus the FX-8350's 125 watts makes it a more efficient choice for dense server deployments where power consumption is a concern. The FX-8350's unlocked multiplier is a notable feature for enthusiasts, but the Xeon's locked multiplier is typical for server chips, where stability is prioritized over overclocking. The verdict is data-driven: the FX-8350 for single-thread, the Xeon for multi-thread.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher clock speed?

A: The AMD FX-8350 has a base clock of 4.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.20 GHz, which is significantly higher than the Intel Xeon E5-1428L v2's base clock of 2.20 GHz and boost clock of 2.70 GHz.

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The AMD FX-8350 has 8 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Xeon E5-1428L v2 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Xeon has fewer physical cores but more threads due to Hyper-Threading.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-1428L v2 supports ECC memory, while the AMD FX-8350 does not. This makes the Xeon more suitable for error-sensitive server applications.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor?

A: The AMD FX-8350 has an average benchmark score of 1557, placing it at the 39th percentile. The Intel Xeon E5-1428L v2 has an average score of 1537, placing it at the 38th percentile.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-1428L v2 has a 15 MB shared L3 cache, while the AMD FX-8350 has an 8 MB shared L3 cache. The Xeon's cache is nearly double the size.

Q: What is the TDP of each processor?

A: The AMD FX-8350 has a TDP of 125 watts, while the Intel Xeon E5-1428L v2 has a TDP of 60 watts. The Xeon is significantly more power-efficient.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on entirely different architectures. The AMD FX-8350 uses the Piledriver architecture, codenamed Vishera, which is a 32 nm design manufactured by GlobalFoundries. It contains 1,200 million transistors on a 315 mm² die. The Intel Xeon E5-1428L v2 uses the Ivy Bridge architecture, codenamed Ivy Bridge-EN, which is a 22 nm design manufactured by Intel. It contains 1,860 million transistors on a 257 mm² die. The Xeon's smaller process node allows for higher transistor density despite the larger transistor count.

The cache hierarchies differ significantly. The FX-8350 has a 384 KB L1 cache and an 8 MB L2 cache, with an additional 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The Xeon E5-1428L v2 has a 64 KB per-core L1 cache and a 256 KB per-core L2 cache, with a much larger 15 MB shared L3 cache. The Xeon's larger L3 cache is a key architectural advantage for multi-threaded workloads, as it allows more data to be stored closer to the cores.

The memory architectures also differ. The FX-8350 supports dual-channel DDR3 memory with a bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s, while the Xeon supports triple-channel DDR3 memory with a bandwidth of 32.0 GB/s. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, a critical feature for server reliability. The PCIe capabilities differ as well: the FX-8350 uses PCIe Gen 2, while the Xeon uses PCIe Gen 3 with 24 lanes (CPU only). The Xeon's newer PCIe standard offers higher bandwidth for expansion cards.

Specification Differences

The processors differ across nearly every key specification. The AMD FX-8350 is a desktop processor with 8 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Xeon E5-1428L v2 is a server/workstation processor with 6 cores and 12 threads. The FX-8350 has a base clock of 4.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.20 GHz, while the Xeon has a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 2.70 GHz. The FX-8350's TDP is 125 watts, while the Xeon's is 60 watts.

The sockets are incompatible: the FX-8350 uses AMD Socket AM3+, while the Xeon uses Intel Socket 1356. The FX-8350 has an unlocked multiplier, while the Xeon's multiplier is locked. The FX-8350's integrated graphics are available on certain motherboards as a chipset feature, while the Xeon has no integrated graphics. The FX-8350 supports dual-channel memory, while the Xeon supports triple-channel memory.

The launch MSRP differs substantially: the AMD FX-8350 was launched at $199, while the Intel Xeon E5-1428L v2 was launched at $494. The FX-8350 was released on 2012-10-22, while the Xeon was released on 2014-01-08. Both are end-of-life products. The FX-8350's part numbers are FD8350FRW8KHKFD8350FRHKBOX, while the Xeon's part number is SR1B9.