CPU Comparison

The AMD PRO A10-8750B and Intel Xeon E5540 are both end-of-life desktop and server/workstation processors, respectively, that land in the same performance tier. The AMD chip, a 28 nm Steamroller part from 2015, and the Intel chip, a 45 nm Nehalem part from 2009, are separated by six years of architectural evolution but deliver nearly identical average benchmark scores. The data shows the AMD PRO A10-8750B holds a slim but consistent lead across every head-to-head test, while the Xeon E5540 counters with platform features like ECC memory support and a higher thread count.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD PRO A10-8750B has an average benchmark score of 821, while the Intel Xeon E5540 scores 820. This places the AMD part a marginal 0.1% ahead of the Xeon in the nearestRivals comparison.

Q: How do the two chips compare in multi-core rendering performance?

A: The AMD PRO A10-8750B wins all multi-core tests. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 254 versus the Xeon's 240, a 5.8% advantage. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the AMD leads 1060 to 1001, a 5.9% margin, and in Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 2525 against the Xeon's 2384, another 5.9% win.

Q: Does the Intel Xeon E5540 win any benchmark comparisons?

A: No. The head-to-head data records 5 wins for the AMD PRO A10-8750B and 0 wins for the Intel Xeon E5540 across all tested Cinebench scenarios, including single-core and multi-core variants.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The AMD PRO A10-8750B has 4 cores and 4 threads. The Intel Xeon E5540 also has 4 cores but supports 8 threads through Hyper-Threading, giving it double the thread count of the AMD chip.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Xeon E5540 supports ECC memory, while the AMD PRO A10-8750B does not. This makes the Xeon a more appropriate choice for error-correcting workloads typical of server environments.

Q: How do their single-core Cinebench R23 scores compare?

A: The AMD PRO A10-8750B scores 356 in Cinebench R23 single-core, while the Intel Xeon E5540 scores 336. This represents a 6% advantage for the AMD processor in this test.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies and manufacturing eras. The AMD PRO A10-8750B is built on a 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries, packing 2,411 million transistors into a 245 mm² die. In contrast, the Intel Xeon E5540 uses a 45 nm process at Intel, with 731 million transistors on a larger 263 mm² die. The newer, denser AMD process allows for significantly more transistors in a smaller area, contributing to its higher clock speeds.

The AMD chip uses the Steamroller architecture under the Godaveri codename, while the Intel chip relies on the older Nehalem architecture from the Gainestown generation. This architectural gap is evident in their cache designs. The AMD PRO A10-8750B has 256 KB of L1 cache and 4 MB of L2 cache, with no L3 cache. The Intel Xeon E5540 has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and a substantial 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The Xeon's larger aggregate cache hierarchy partially compensates for its lower clock speeds.

Clock speeds differ dramatically. The AMD part runs at a 3.60 GHz base clock and boosts to 4.00 GHz, while the Intel part operates at a 2.53 GHz base and 2.80 GHz boost. This gives the AMD processor a 1.07 GHz advantage at base and 1.20 GHz at boost. The Xeon compensates with a higher thread count (8 vs 4) and a lower TDP of 80 watts compared to the AMD's 95 watts.

Platform support diverges as well. The AMD PRO A10-8750B uses the AMD Socket FM2+ interface and includes integrated Radeon R7 graphics, making it a complete APU solution. The Intel Xeon E5540 uses the Intel Socket 1366, has no integrated graphics, and is classified as a server/workstation part. Memory support also differs: both support DDR3, but the AMD chip uses dual-channel memory with 34.1 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel chip uses triple-channel memory with 25.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Xeon supports ECC memory, while the AMD does not. PCIe capabilities favor the AMD chip with Gen 3 and 16 lanes (CPU only), whereas the Intel chip is limited to Gen 2.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data reveals a consistent pattern: the AMD PRO A10-8750B wins every single test, but by relatively narrow margins. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD scores 254 against the Xeon's 240, a 5.8% difference. This is the smallest win in the dataset, suggesting that the Xeon's additional threads help it stay competitive in older multi-threaded workloads.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the AMD extends its lead slightly. In multi-core, it scores 1060 versus 1001, a 5.9% advantage. In single-core, the AMD scores 149 against 141, a 5.7% win. The single-core margin is slightly smaller than the multi-core margin, indicating that the Xeon's lower clock speed hurts it more in lightly-threaded tasks.

Cinebench R23 shows the same trend with slightly larger deltas. The AMD scores 2525 in multi-core versus the Xeon's 2384, a 5.9% difference. In single-core, the AMD scores 356 against 336, which is a 6% advantage, the largest margin in the entire head-to-head set. This suggests that as workloads become more modern and demanding, the AMD's higher clock speeds and newer architecture provide a growing advantage over the older Xeon.

The overall average benchmark scores confirm this near-parity. The AMD PRO A10-8750B averages 821, while the Intel Xeon E5540 averages 820. The deltaPct between them is a mere 0.1% in favor of the AMD. Both processors sit at the 22nd percentile of all CPUs, meaning they are statistically indistinguishable in aggregate performance. The head-to-head wins, however, are decisive: 5 for the AMD, 0 for the Intel.

Specification Differences

The specification table highlights several key differences between the two processors. The AMD PRO A10-8750B has 4 cores and 4 threads, while the Intel Xeon E5540 has 4 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks are 3.60 GHz for the AMD and 2.53 GHz for the Intel, with boost clocks of 4.00 GHz and 2.80 GHz, respectively. The AMD has a higher TDP of 95 watts versus the Intel's 80 watts.

Socket compatibility is entirely different: the AMD uses AMD Socket FM2+, while the Intel uses Intel Socket 1366. The process nodes are 28 nm for the AMD and 45 nm for the Intel. Transistor counts are 2,411 million for the AMD and 731 million for the Intel, with die sizes of 245 mm² and 263 mm², respectively.

Cache configurations differ significantly. The AMD has 256 KB of L1 and 4 MB of L2, 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. Memory support is DDR3 for both, but the AMD uses dual-channel with 34.1 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel uses triple-channel with 25.6 GB/s bandwidth. ECC memory support is available only on the Intel Xeon.

The AMD includes Radeon R7 integrated graphics, while the Intel has no integrated graphics. PCIe support is Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only) on the AMD, versus Gen 2 on the Intel. The AMD targets the desktop market, while the Intel is positioned for server/workstation use. The AMD was released on 2015-09-28, while the Intel launched on 2009-03-29. The Intel Xeon E5540 has a launch MSRP of $774; the AMD part has no listed launch MSRP. Both processors have locked multipliers and are end-of-life. Part numbers are AD875BYBI44JC for the AMD and SLBF6 for the Intel.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD PRO A10-8750B wins across the board in raw benchmark performance. Its 5-6% advantages in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both single and multi-core, make it the clear choice for general-purpose computing tasks where clock speed and modern architecture matter. The AMD's 3.60 GHz base clock and 4.00 GHz boost clock, combined with its 28 nm process and higher transistor count, deliver tangible benefits in both lightly-threaded and multi-threaded workloads. Its integrated Radeon R7 graphics also make it a self-contained solution for systems that do not require a discrete GPU, which is a significant advantage for desktop builds. The AMD's dual-channel memory with 34.1 GB/s bandwidth provides higher theoretical memory throughput than the Xeon's triple-channel setup, despite the Xeon having more channels.

The Intel Xeon E5540 wins in platform features rather than raw speed. Its support for ECC memory is critical for error-sensitive workloads in server and workstation environments where data integrity is paramount. The 8-thread count, double that of the AMD, gives it better multi-threading capability in workloads that scale with thread count, even if the benchmark data shows it still loses to the AMD's higher clock speeds. The Xeon's 8 MB of shared L3 cache is a substantial advantage for workloads that benefit from larger cache pools. Its lower TDP of 80 watts makes it more power-efficient per core, which can be a consideration in dense server deployments. The triple-channel memory interface, while lower in total bandwidth, offers a different memory topology that may be advantageous in specific server workloads. The Xeon's launch MSRP of $774 also positions it as a premium server part, though pricing is not a factor in performance analysis.

For desktop users and those needing integrated graphics, the AMD PRO A10-8750B is the stronger choice based on benchmark performance. For server administrators requiring ECC memory and higher thread counts, the Intel Xeon E5540 offers platform advantages that benchmarks do not capture. The data shows a statistical tie in average scores, but the AMD holds a consistent edge in every measured test, making it the performance winner. The Intel, however, remains relevant for its reliability features and server-grade capabilities.