AMD PRO A10-8750B vs Intel Xeon X3450 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data paints a remarkably consistent picture: the AMD PRO A10-8750B wins every single head-to-head test in the FACT PACK, yet the margins are so narrow that the two processors are essentially inseparable in real-world terms. Across five Cinebench comparisons, the AMD part never leads by more than 3.7 percent, and in several cases the gap is under 3.5 percent. This is not a rout; it is a statistical dead heat with a consistent, if tiny, tilt toward the AMD chip.

Starting with the multi-core workloads, the AMD PRO A10-8750B scores 254 in Cinebench R15 multi-core versus the Intel Xeon X3450’s 245, a delta of -3.5 percent (negative values indicate the Intel part is behind). The pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core: AMD posts 1060, Intel manages 1021, a 3.7 percent deficit for the Xeon. The R23 multi-core test shows 2525 for AMD versus 2431 for Intel, again a 3.7 percent gap. These are the largest margins in the entire dataset, but even the biggest differential is smaller than what many generational leaps produce.

Single-core results tell the same story with even less separation. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the AMD part scores 149 against Intel’s 144, a 3.4 percent edge. The R23 single-core test shows 356 versus 343, a 3.7 percent gap. Notably, the AMD chip’s single-core advantage is nearly identical in percentage terms to its multi-core advantage, suggesting the performance edge is uniform across threaded and unthreaded workloads rather than being a function of core count or scaling efficiency.

What does this mean in practical terms? The Intel Xeon X3450, despite having eight threads to the AMD’s four, cannot convert that extra thread count into a multi-core victory. The AMD PRO A10-8750B’s higher base and boost clocks — 3.60 GHz and 4.00 GHz versus 2.67 GHz and 3.20 GHz — appear to compensate fully for the Xeon’s hyper-threading advantage. The data implies that clock speed, not thread count, is the dominant factor in these Cinebench workloads.

Looking at the aggregate benchmark scores, the two chips are even closer than the head-to-head tests suggest. The Intel Xeon X3450 has an average benchmark score of 837, while the AMD PRO A10-8750B sits at 821. That is a 1.9 percent advantage for Intel in the overall average, which includes additional Geekbench results that only the AMD part submitted. This apparent contradiction — Intel wins the average but loses every Cinebench head-to-head — likely reflects the inclusion of the AMD’s Geekbench scores (985 multi-core, 416 single-core) in its average, which drag its aggregate down relative to its Cinebench performance.

Both processors land at the 22nd percentile among all CPUs, meaning they outperform roughly a fifth of the database’s entries. The nearest rival for the Intel part is the Intel Core i5-5200U with an average score of 838 (delta -0.1 percent), while the AMD chip’s closest competitor is the Intel Xeon E5540 at 820 (delta 0.1 percent). These rival positions confirm that both chips operate in the same performance tier, surrounded by low-power mobile parts and older server chips.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two processors is vast, even though their benchmark performance is nearly identical. The Intel Xeon X3450 uses the Nehalem architecture on the Lynnfield codename, built on Intel’s 45 nm process node with 774 million transistors packed into a 296 mm² die. The AMD PRO A10-8750B uses the Steamroller architecture on the Godaveri codename, fabricated by GlobalFoundries on a 28 nm process with 2,411 million transistors across a 245 mm² die. The transistor count difference is staggering — AMD packs over three times as many transistors into a smaller die, thanks to the denser 28 nm node.

Cache hierarchies diverge sharply. The Intel part allocates 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, then pools 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part offers 256 KB of L1 cache total and 4 MB of L2 cache with no L3 at all. The Xeon’s 8 MB of shared L3 gives it a significant cache capacity advantage, yet this does not translate into benchmark wins, suggesting that the AMD’s higher clock speeds and memory bandwidth compensate for its smaller cache footprint.

Memory bandwidth is another clear differentiator. The AMD PRO A10-8750B supports dual-channel DDR3 with 34.1 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Intel Xeon X3450 manages only 21.3 GB/s on the same dual-channel DDR3 configuration. That is a 60 percent bandwidth advantage for AMD, which likely helps feed its four Steamroller cores efficiently. However, the Intel part supports ECC memory while the AMD does not, a feature that matters for server workloads where data integrity is critical.

The integrated GPU is a decisive architectural split. The AMD PRO A10-8750B includes Radeon R7 integrated graphics, while the Intel Xeon X3450 has no integrated graphics at all. This means the AMD chip can power a display without a discrete GPU, whereas the Xeon requires a separate graphics card. This single difference likely explains much of the use-case divergence despite their similar CPU performance.

PCIe connectivity also differs: the Intel part runs Gen 2 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the AMD chip offers Gen 3 with 16 lanes. The newer PCIe standard doubles the potential bandwidth for add-in cards, though the benchmark data does not directly measure this impact. The Xeon’s socket is Intel Socket 1156, while the AMD uses AMD Socket FM2+, meaning platform choices are entirely separate.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most benchmarks?

A: The AMD PRO A10-8750B wins all five head-to-head Cinebench tests listed in the FACT PACK. Its margins range from 3.4 percent to 3.7 percent over the Intel Xeon X3450 across R15, R20, and R23 multi-core and single-core tests.

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: Both processors have 4 physical cores. The Intel Xeon X3450 supports 8 threads via hyper-threading, while the AMD PRO A10-8750B has 4 threads total. Despite this, the AMD chip wins all multi-core benchmarks, indicating its clock speed advantage overcomes the Intel’s thread advantage.

Q: Do the two chips have integrated graphics?

A: No. The AMD PRO A10-8750B includes Radeon R7 integrated graphics. The Intel Xeon X3450 has no integrated graphics, so it requires a discrete GPU for display output.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD PRO A10-8750B provides 34.1 GB/s of dual-channel DDR3 bandwidth. The Intel Xeon X3450 provides 21.3 GB/s on the same dual-channel DDR3 configuration, giving AMD a substantial bandwidth advantage.

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Xeon X3450 supports ECC memory. The AMD PRO A10-8750B does not, which may matter for server or workstation deployments where error-correcting memory is required.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel Xeon X3450 has an average benchmark score of 837, while the AMD PRO A10-8750B scores 821. Both sit at the 22nd percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon X3450 | AMD PRO A10-8750B |

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

| Threads | 8 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 2.67 GHz | 3.60 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.20 GHz | 4.00 GHz |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1156 | AMD Socket FM2+ |

| Architecture | Nehalem | Steamroller |

| Codename | Lynnfield | Godaveri |

| Process Node | 45 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 774 million | 2,411 million |

| Die Size | 296 mm² | 245 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 256 KB (total) |

| L2 Cache | 256 KB (per core) | 4 MB (total) |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 21.3 GB/s | 34.1 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe Version | Gen 2 | Gen 3 |

| Integrated Graphics | None | Radeon R7 |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2009-09-07 | 2015-09-28 |

| Launch MSRP | $241 | Not listed |

The Intel part is older, uses a larger process node, and lacks integrated graphics, but it offers ECC support and shared L3 cache. The AMD part is newer, denser, faster-clocked, and includes both integrated graphics and higher memory bandwidth.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD PRO A10-8750B wins in every measured CPU benchmark, but its advantages extend beyond raw compute. Its integrated Radeon R7 graphics make it a self-contained desktop solution that can drive a display without any add-in card. The 34.1 GB/s memory bandwidth is substantially higher than the Intel’s 21.3 GB/s, which matters for memory-intensive applications that constantly stream data. The higher base clock of 3.60 GHz and boost clock of 4.00 GHz give it an edge in lightly threaded workloads where clock speed dominates.

The Intel Xeon X3450 wins in the areas that the benchmark data does not directly measure but that the specification sheet reveals. It supports ECC memory, making it suitable for server or workstation environments where memory errors are unacceptable. Its 8 MB of shared L3 cache is double the total cache capacity of the AMD part (when accounting for the AMD’s 4 MB L2), which could benefit workloads with large working sets that fit in cache. The eight threads provide better parallel scheduling flexibility for heavily threaded server applications, even if Cinebench does not reward this advantage. The Xeon also carries a launch MSRP of $241, though no comparable figure exists for the AMD part.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD PRO A10-8750B is the faster processor in every tested workload. It wins all five Cinebench comparisons with margins between 3.4 percent and 3.7 percent. If the decision rests solely on CPU performance, the AMD part is the correct choice. It also delivers integrated graphics, higher memory bandwidth, and a newer PCIe generation, making it the more feature-complete package for a desktop system.

The Intel Xeon X3450, however, retains a clear niche in server and workstation deployments where ECC memory support is non-negotiable. Its eight threads and larger L3 cache may also benefit specific multi-threaded server workloads that Cinebench does not represent. The Xeon’s 22nd percentile ranking and average score of 837 versus the AMD’s 821 show that the aggregate performance is statistically similar, even though the head-to-head tests favor AMD.

For a desktop user who needs a single chip that handles both compute and display output, the AMD PRO A10-8750B is the data-backed pick. For a server builder who requires ECC memory and does not need integrated graphics, the Intel Xeon X3450 remains a viable option despite its slower benchmark results. The 3.7 percent performance gap is real but modest; the architectural differences — ECC, cache, graphics, bandwidth — are what should drive the final decision.