AMD FX-8800P vs Intel Xeon E5540 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a narrow but consistent victory for the AMD FX-8800P across every recorded test. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the AMD scores 242 against 240 for the Intel Xeon E5540, a 0.8% lead. The margin widens slightly in Cinebench R20 multicore, where the AMD reaches 1010 versus 1001, a 0.9% advantage. Single-core results follow the same pattern: the AMD posts 142 in Cinebench R20 single-core against 141 for the Intel, a 0.7% edge, and 339 in Cinebench R23 single-core versus 336, a 0.9% lead. The largest gap appears in Cinebench R23 multicore, where the AMD scores 2407 against 2384, a 1% difference.

These deltas are small, but they are uniform. The AMD FX-8800P wins all five head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Xeon E5540 records zero wins. In the database's broader context, both processors sit at the 22nd percentile among all CPUs, meaning they occupy the same performance tier. The AMD's average benchmark score is 843, while the Intel's is 820, a difference of 23 points. The AMD's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-3520M at a 0% delta, the Intel Core i7-920 at 0.3%, and the Intel Xeon X5470 at 0.4%. The Intel Xeon E5540's nearest rivals include the AMD PRO A10-8750B at -0.1%, the Intel Core i5-L16G7 at 0.5%, and the Intel Xeon X3440 at 0.6%. The two CPUs therefore compete in the same performance neighborhood, but the AMD holds the edge in every measured workload.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design eras. The AMD FX-8800P, released in June 2015, uses the Excavator architecture on a 28 nm process node, fabricated by GlobalFoundries. It packs 3,100 million transistors onto a 250 mm² die. The Intel Xeon E5540, released in March 2009, uses the Nehalem architecture on a 45 nm process node, built by Intel. It contains 731 million transistors on a 263 mm² die. The transistor count difference is striking: the AMD has more than four times the transistors of the Intel, packed into a slightly smaller die.

Core and thread configurations also differ. The AMD FX-8800P has 4 cores and 4 threads, meaning no simultaneous multithreading. The Intel Xeon E5540 has 4 cores and 8 threads, using Hyper-Threading to double logical thread count. Despite this, the AMD still wins the multi-threaded benchmarks, which indicates that the Intel's extra threads do not compensate for its older core design. The AMD's cache layout includes 320 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per module, with no L3 cache. The Intel has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The presence of a large L3 cache on the Intel is a structural advantage, yet the benchmark results show it does not translate into superior performance.

Memory support differs as well. Both support DDR3, but the AMD uses a dual-channel memory bus with a theoretical bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s, while the Intel uses a triple-channel memory bus with a theoretical bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s. The AMD's higher bandwidth figure comes despite fewer channels, reflecting its newer memory controller. The Intel supports ECC memory, while the AMD does not. The AMD also integrates a Radeon R7 8CU graphics unit, while the Intel has no integrated graphics. PCIe support also diverges: the AMD offers Gen 3 with 8 CPU-only lanes, while the Intel offers Gen 2.

Clock speeds favor the Intel on paper: the Xeon E5540 runs at a base clock of 2.53 GHz and a boost clock of 2.80 GHz, while the AMD runs at 2.10 GHz base and 3.40 GHz boost. The AMD's boost clock is significantly higher, which helps it overcome the Intel's base advantage in single-threaded tasks. The TDP figures are dramatically different: the AMD draws 15 watts, while the Intel draws 80 watts. This is a 65-watt gap, making the AMD far more power-efficient.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in multi-threaded Cinebench R23 performance?

A: The AMD FX-8800P wins with a score of 2407 against 2384 for the Intel Xeon E5540, a 1% difference.

Q: Does the Intel Xeon E5540 have more threads than the AMD FX-8800P?

A: Yes, the Intel has 8 threads to the AMD's 4 threads. Both have 4 cores, but the Intel uses Hyper-Threading.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Xeon E5540 supports ECC memory, while the AMD FX-8800P does not.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The AMD FX-8800P has a theoretical memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s with a dual-channel bus, while the Intel Xeon E5540 has 25.6 GB/s with a triple-channel bus.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The AMD FX-8800P includes a Radeon R7 8CU integrated graphics unit, while the Intel Xeon E5540 has no integrated graphics.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD FX-8800P has an average benchmark score of 843, while the Intel Xeon E5540 has an average of 820.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD FX-8800P | Intel Xeon E5540 |

|---------------|--------------|------------------|

| Cores | 4 | 4 |

| Threads | 4 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 2.10 GHz | 2.53 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.40 GHz | 2.80 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 80 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP4 | Intel Socket 1366 |

| Architecture | Excavator | Nehalem |

| Codename | Carrizo | Gainestown |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 45 nm |

| Transistors | 3,100 million | 731 million |

| Die Size | 250 mm² | 263 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 320 KB | 64 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per module) | 256 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | None | 8 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Triple-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 34.1 GB/s | 25.6 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 8 lanes (CPU only) | Gen 2 |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon R7 8CU | None |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Server/Workstation |

| Release Date | 2015-06-01 | 2009-03-29 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | $774 |

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FX-8800P wins every benchmark recorded in the database. Its advantages are most pronounced in Cinebench R23 multicore, where it leads by 1%, and in Cinebench R20 multicore, where it leads by 0.9%. It also wins single-core tests by 0.7% to 0.9%. The AMD's strengths lie in its higher boost clock (3.40 GHz versus 2.80 GHz), its newer Excavator architecture, its larger transistor count, and its higher memory bandwidth. It also offers integrated graphics, which the Intel lacks entirely. For tasks that rely on single-thread speed or require an integrated GPU, the AMD is the clear choice.

The Intel Xeon E5540, despite losing every head-to-head comparison, has its own structural advantages. It supports ECC memory, making it suitable for error-sensitive workloads. It has a triple-channel memory bus, which can be beneficial in memory-heavy server scenarios even though its theoretical bandwidth is lower. It has a shared 8 MB L3 cache, which can improve data locality. Its market segment is server and workstation, and it was launched with a $774 MSRP, indicating its original positioning as a professional-grade part. However, the benchmark data does not show any workload where the Intel outperforms the AMD.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD FX-8800P outperforms the Intel Xeon E5540 in every recorded benchmark, with margins ranging from 0.7% to 1%. The AMD achieves this with a 15 W TDP, far lower than the Intel's 80 W TDP, and with integrated graphics that the Intel does not have. The Intel's extra threads and larger L3 cache do not translate into a performance win. The Intel's only clear advantages are ECC memory support and its triple-channel memory bus, which may matter in specific server environments.

For a mobile or general-purpose user, the AMD FX-8800P is the better choice based on performance, power efficiency, and integrated graphics. For a server workload requiring ECC memory, the Intel Xeon E5540 retains a niche appeal, but the recorded benchmarks show the AMD winning all performance tests. Users who prioritize lower power consumption, newer architecture, and integrated graphics should select the AMD FX-8800P. Users who require ECC memory or a triple-channel memory bus for legacy server platforms may still consider the Intel Xeon E5540, but they must accept that it trails in every measured performance metric.