AMD PRO A8-9600 vs Intel Xeon X3470 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in the Cinebench R23 multi-core test?

A: The Intel Xeon X3470 scores 2857 points, while the AMD PRO A8-9600 scores 2820 points. The Intel part leads by a 1.3% margin in that specific workload.

Q: Do both chips support ECC memory?

A: No. The Intel Xeon X3470 supports ECC memory, while the AMD PRO A8-9600 does not list ECC as a supported feature.

Q: What is the difference in process technology between the two?

A: The Intel chip is built on a 45 nm process at Intel's foundry, while the AMD part uses a 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The AMD chip integrates more transistors (3,100 million) compared to Intel's 774 million.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Xeon X3470 has a boost clock of 3.60 GHz, which is higher than the AMD PRO A8-9600's boost clock of 3.40 GHz.

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

A: The Intel Xeon X3470 has an average benchmark score of 983, while the AMD PRO A8-9600 scores 971. Both chips sit at the 26th percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Q: Which chip supports PCIe Gen 3?

A: The AMD PRO A8-9600 supports PCIe Gen 3 with 8 lanes, whereas the Intel Xeon X3470 only provides PCIe Gen 2 with 16 lanes.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design eras and philosophies. The Intel Xeon X3470 comes from the Nehalem architecture, specifically the Lynnfield codename, and was released in 2009 for the server and workstation segment. It uses a 45 nm process node with 774 million transistors on a 296 mm² die. The AMD PRO A8-9600, by contrast, is based on the Excavator architecture with the Bristol Ridge codename, released in 2016 for desktop systems. It uses a 28 nm process node with 3,100 million transistors on a 250 mm² die.

The core and thread configuration differs significantly. The Intel Xeon X3470 offers 4 cores and 8 threads, enabling simultaneous multithreading. The AMD PRO A8-9600 also has 4 cores but only 4 threads, so it cannot process two threads per core. This gives the Intel chip a theoretical advantage in heavily threaded workloads, which the benchmark data confirms, albeit by small margins.

Cache hierarchies are structured differently. The Intel chip has a per-core L1 cache of 64 KB and per-core L2 of 256 KB, plus a shared 8 MB L3 cache. The AMD part has a total L1 cache of 320 KB and a total L2 cache of 2 MB, with no L3 cache at all. The larger shared L3 on the Intel side likely helps with data reuse across cores.

Memory support also diverges. The Intel Xeon X3470 uses DDR3 memory on a dual-channel bus, providing 21.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD PRO A8-9600 supports DDR4 memory, also dual-channel, with a much higher 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. The newer memory standard gives the AMD chip a substantial theoretical bandwidth advantage, even though the benchmark results do not show a corresponding performance edge.

The AMD processor includes integrated graphics, specifically a Radeon R7, while the Intel Xeon X3470 has no integrated graphics. This makes the AMD chip a more complete package for systems without a discrete GPU. The PCIe support also differs: the Intel part offers Gen 2 with 16 lanes, while the AMD part offers Gen 3 with 8 lanes.

Production statuses are opposite. The Intel Xeon X3470 is end-of-life, whereas the AMD PRO A8-9600 remains active. The Intel chip's launch MSRP was $589, while the AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP. The Intel processor also has a higher TDP at 95 watts, compared to 65 watts for the AMD chip, meaning the AMD part is more power-efficient on paper.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head results show the Intel Xeon X3470 winning all five benchmark comparisons, but by very narrow margins. In the Cinebench R15 multi-core test, the Intel chip scores 287 against the AMD's 284, a 1.1% difference. The R20 multi-core test shows a similar pattern: 1199 for Intel versus 1184 for AMD, a 1.3% lead.

Single-core performance follows the same trend. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the Intel Xeon X3470 scores 169, while the AMD PRO A8-9600 scores 167, a 1.2% edge. The R23 single-core test has Intel at 403 and AMD at 398, again a 1.3% advantage for the Intel part.

The R23 multi-core result mirrors the R20 multi-core margin exactly: 2857 for Intel and 2820 for AMD, a 1.3% difference. Across all five tests, the Intel processor never loses a single comparison, but the maximum winning margin is only 1.3%. This is a remarkably close pairing.

These margins are small enough that they could be considered within run-to-run variance for many workloads. However, the consistency of the Intel lead across multiple test generations suggests a real, if modest, performance advantage. The Intel chip's extra threads likely contribute to its multi-core wins, while its higher boost clock of 3.60 GHz versus 3.40 GHz may explain the single-core edge.

The average benchmark scores from the broader database reinforce this picture. The Intel Xeon X3470 averages 983, while the AMD PRO A8-9600 averages 971, a roughly 1.2% gap. Both processors sit at the 26th percentile among all CPUs, meaning they are equally positioned in the overall performance distribution.

Looking at nearest rivals from the database, the Intel chip is most closely matched by the Intel Core i3-4370T, with an identical average score of 983. The AMD part's nearest rival is the Intel Core i5-2400S, which scores 968, meaning the AMD chip is 0.3% ahead of that rival. These contextual comparisons show both processors occupying a similar performance tier.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but narrow winner: the Intel Xeon X3470 outperforms the AMD PRO A8-9600 in every recorded benchmark test. The margins range from 1.1% to 1.3%, which is not a transformative difference, but it is a consistent one. For users who prioritize raw CPU compute performance, the Intel chip is the better choice.

However, the AMD PRO A8-9600 has advantages that the benchmark scores do not capture. It includes integrated graphics, supports DDR4 memory with nearly double the bandwidth, and consumes 30 watts less power. It is also an active product, whereas the Intel Xeon X3470 is end-of-life. The AMD chip is better suited for a modern desktop build, especially one that needs a GPU and lower power draw.

The Intel Xeon X3470 is the pick for workloads that depend purely on multi-threaded CPU throughput, such as rendering or batch processing, where its 8 threads and 8 MB shared L3 cache provide a slight edge. The AMD PRO A8-9600 is the pick for systems that need a complete, power-efficient platform with modern memory and PCIe support, and where a 1.3% CPU performance difference is irrelevant.

Neither processor is a performance leader by any stretch. Both sit at the 26th percentile, and their nearest rivals include low-end and older parts. The choice between them should hinge on platform requirements rather than benchmark bragging rights, because the compute difference is statistically minor.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification category. The Intel Xeon X3470 uses the Nehalem architecture with the Lynnfield codename, while the AMD PRO A8-9600 uses Excavator with the Bristol Ridge codename. The Intel chip offers 4 cores and 8 threads, the AMD chip offers 4 cores and 4 threads.

Clock speeds are close but not identical. The Intel base clock is 2.93 GHz with a boost of 3.60 GHz. The AMD base clock is 3.10 GHz with a boost of 3.40 GHz. The Intel part has the higher boost, while the AMD part has the higher base.

Process technology differs by generation: 45 nm for Intel versus 28 nm for AMD. Transistor counts are dramatically different, with AMD at 3,100 million versus Intel's 774 million. Die sizes are 296 mm² for Intel and 250 mm² for AMD.

Cache layouts are distinct. The Intel chip has 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3. The AMD chip has 320 KB total L1 and 2 MB total L2, with no L3.

Memory support favors AMD: DDR4 versus DDR3, with bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s versus 21.3 GB/s. The AMD chip supports PCIe Gen 3 with 8 lanes, while the Intel chip supports PCIe Gen 2 with 16 lanes. ECC memory is supported only on the Intel side.

The AMD processor includes Radeon R7 integrated graphics; the Intel processor has none. The Intel part is a server and workstation product, while the AMD part is a desktop product. The Intel chip's TDP is 95 watts, the AMD chip's is 65 watts. The Intel chip has a launch MSRP of $589, while the AMD chip has no recorded launch MSRP.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon X3470 wins in all five recorded benchmark comparisons. Its strongest margins, 1.3%, appear in the Cinebench R20 multi-core, R23 multi-core, and R23 single-core tests. This suggests the Intel chip is slightly better for CPU-bound rendering tasks, particularly those that can use its 8 threads.

The Intel chip also wins on features relevant to server and workstation use: ECC memory support, a larger shared L3 cache, and more PCIe lanes (16 versus 8). For applications that benefit from error-correcting memory or larger pooled caches, the Intel Xeon X3470 is the more appropriate choice.

The AMD PRO A8-9600 wins on platform-level capabilities. It has integrated graphics, which the Intel chip lacks entirely, making it suitable for systems without a discrete GPU. It supports DDR4 memory with 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth, which is nearly double the Intel chip's 21.3 GB/s. It also uses PCIe Gen 3, offering newer connectivity despite fewer lanes.

The AMD chip is more power-efficient, with a 65 watt TDP compared to 95 watts. It is an active product, while the Intel chip is end-of-life, meaning the AMD part is more likely to be available for new builds. For a modern desktop that needs a GPU, lower power consumption, and faster memory, the AMD PRO A8-9600 is the clear choice.

In terms of production status and memory standard, the AMD chip represents a more current platform. The Intel chip, despite its slight benchmark edge, is tied to older DDR3 and PCIe Gen 2 infrastructure. The data shows that if the goal is maximum CPU compute in legacy server workloads, pick Intel; if the goal is a balanced, current desktop platform, pick AMD.