CPU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data delivers a decisive, if narrow, verdict: AMD PRO A8-9600 wins all five head-to-head Cinebench comparisons against the Intel Xeon X5570. The largest margin comes in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the AMD part scores 167 against Intel's 166, a 0.6% advantage. Multi-core results follow the same pattern: Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 2820 versus 2810 (0.4%), R20 multi-core shows 1184 versus 1180 (0.3%), and R15 multi-core shows 284 versus 283 (0.4%). Even the tightest race, Cinebench R23 single-core, lands in AMD's favor at 398 versus 396, a 0.5% edge.

These deltas are small in absolute terms, but they are consistent across every workload in the comparison. The AMD PRO A8-9600 never trails, and the Intel Xeon X5570 never leads. In aggregate, the AMD part carries an average benchmark score of 971 against Intel's 967, a rounding-level difference that still tilts toward the newer design. Both processors sit at the 26th percentile among all CPUs, which places them in the same performance tier — but within that tier, the AMD chip is the one with the edge in every measured test.

The nearest-rival data reinforces this picture. The AMD PRO A8-9600's closest competitor, the AMD A10-7870K, scores 975, a -0.4% delta, meaning the A10 is actually slightly faster on average. The Intel Xeon X5570's nearest rival, the Intel Celeron N5100, scores 966, a 0.1% delta in the Xeon's favor. Neither chip is a standout in its neighborhood; both are mid-pack performers. But the head-to-head numbers show that when these two specific processors face off, the AMD PRO A8-9600 takes every round.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD PRO A8-9600 wins on raw compute consistency. It is ahead in all five Cinebench iterations, covering both single-core and multi-core workloads across R15, R20, and R23. That means the AMD chip holds an advantage in both lightly threaded tasks (single-core) and fully loaded scenarios (multi-core). The data shows no workload category where the Intel Xeon X5570 pulls ahead — not in older R15 tests, not in newer R23 tests, not in single-threaded, not in multi-threaded.

The Intel Xeon X5570, however, wins on platform and feature territory that benchmarks do not capture. It supports ECC memory, a capability the AMD PRO A8-9600 lacks entirely. It runs DDR3 in a triple-channel configuration, while the AMD chip uses dual-channel DDR4. For a server or workstation environment where data integrity matters more than a 0.4% Cinebench margin, the Xeon's ECC support is a decisive functional advantage that no benchmark score can express.

The AMD PRO A8-9600 also wins on power efficiency. Its TDP is 65 watts against Intel's 95 watts — a 30-watt gap that means the AMD part generates less heat and requires less cooling. The AMD chip is also an active production part, while the Xeon is end-of-life. For anyone building a new system today, the AMD processor is the one that is still available and supported. The Xeon, released in March 2009, is a legacy component.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural eras and different design philosophies. The AMD PRO A8-9600 uses the Excavator architecture on the Bristol Ridge codename, built on a 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It integrates 3,100 million transistors on a 250 mm² die. The Intel Xeon X5570 uses the Nehalem architecture with the Gainestown codename, built on Intel's 45 nm process with 731 million transistors on a 263 mm² die. The transistor count difference is stark — AMD packs more than four times as many transistors into a slightly smaller die — but the newer process node explains why AMD achieves this with a 65-watt TDP versus Intel's 95 watts.

Core and thread configurations differ. Both have four physical cores, but the Intel Xeon X5570 supports Hyper-Threading, giving it 8 threads total, while the AMD PRO A8-9600 runs 4 threads with no SMT. Despite having half the thread count, the AMD chip still wins the multi-core benchmarks, which suggests its per-core efficiency on the 28 nm Excavator architecture outweighs the Xeon's thread advantage on 45 nm Nehalem.

Cache hierarchies are also dissimilar. The AMD part has 320 KB of L1 and 2 MB of L2, with no L3 cache. The Intel part has 64 KB of L1 per core (256 KB total for four cores), 256 KB of L2 per core (1 MB total), and a shared 8 MB L3. Intel's larger cache pool is a traditional strength for server workloads, but the benchmark data indicates that this did not translate into a compute win in Cinebench.

Memory support splits along platform lines. AMD uses dual-channel DDR4 with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. Intel uses triple-channel DDR3 with 32.0 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD part has a higher memory bandwidth figure, but the Intel part has the wider memory bus. PCIe also differs: AMD offers PCIe Gen 3 with 8 lanes (CPU only), while Intel offers PCIe Gen 2. The AMD part includes integrated Radeon R7 graphics; the Xeon has no integrated graphics at all.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher base clock speed?

A: The AMD PRO A8-9600 runs at 3.10 GHz base, while the Intel Xeon X5570 runs at 2.93 GHz base. AMD also has the higher boost clock at 3.40 GHz versus 3.33 GHz.

Q: Does the Intel Xeon X5570 support ECC memory?

A: Yes. ECC memory support is listed as true for the Xeon X5570. The AMD PRO A8-9600 does not support ECC memory.

Q: Which CPU has more threads?

A: The Intel Xeon X5570 has 8 threads from 4 cores via Hyper-Threading. The AMD PRO A8-9600 has 4 threads from 4 cores with no SMT. Despite this, the AMD chip wins all multi-core Cinebench tests in the head-to-head comparison.

Q: What is the production status of each processor?

A: The AMD PRO A8-9600 is listed as active, meaning it is still in production. The Intel Xeon X5570 is end-of-life.

Q: Which CPU has integrated graphics?

A: The AMD PRO A8-9600 includes Radeon R7 integrated graphics. The Intel Xeon X5570 has no integrated graphics.

Q: How much L3 cache does the AMD PRO A8-9600 have?

A: The AMD part has no L3 cache at all. Its cache consists of 320 KB L1 and 2 MB L2. The Intel Xeon X5570 has 8 MB of shared L3.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD PRO A8-9600 outperforms the Intel Xeon X5570 in every single Cinebench test measured. Five wins out of five, with margins ranging from 0.3% to 0.6%. The average benchmark score confirms this — 971 for AMD versus 967 for Intel. If the decision rests purely on compute performance, the AMD PRO A8-9600 is the pick, despite being a desktop part going up against a server/workstation processor.

The Intel Xeon X5570 makes sense only for specific legacy or server-oriented use cases. Its ECC memory support is a genuine advantage for error-sensitive workloads. Its 8 threads, triple-channel DDR3, and 8 MB shared L3 are characteristics of a server platform. But it is end-of-life, draws 95 watts, and loses every compute benchmark to the AMD chip. The Xeon's launch MSRP was $1386, which reflects its original server positioning, but the data shows it now sits in the same 26th percentile as the AMD part.

For a new build, the AMD PRO A8-9600 is the rational choice. It is active in production, uses less power (65W TDP), has a newer process node (28 nm versus 45 nm), supports DDR4, includes integrated graphics, and wins every benchmark in the comparison. The only reason to select the Intel Xeon X5570 is if the workload specifically requires ECC memory and you are constrained to a Socket 1366 platform with DDR3. Otherwise, the data points firmly toward AMD.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD PRO A8-9600 | Intel Xeon X5570 |

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

| Cores | 4 | 4 |

| Threads | 4 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 3.10 GHz | 2.93 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.40 GHz | 3.33 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 95 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM4 | Intel Socket 1366 |

| Architecture | Excavator | Nehalem |

| Codename | Bristol Ridge | Gainestown |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 45 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | Intel |

| Transistors | 3,100 million | 731 million |

| Die Size | 250 mm² | 263 mm² |

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

| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 256 KB (per core) |

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

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR3 |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 38.4 GB/s | 32.0 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

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

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon R7 | None |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2016-10-02 | 2009-03-29 |

| Launch MSRP | None | $1386 |

| Part Number | AD960BAGM44AB | SLBF3 |

| Percentile vs All CPUs | 26 | 26 |

| Avg Benchmark Score | 971 | 967 |