Intel Xeon E5-2697 v3
vs
AMD FX-6350
vs
10
7
Select any two CPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game Xeon E5-2697 v3 FX-6350

In terms of overall gaming performance, the Intel Xeon E5-2697 v3 is massively better than the AMD FX-6350 when it comes to running the latest games. This also means it will be less likely to bottleneck more powerful GPUs, allowing them to achieve more of their gaming performance potential.

The Xeon E5-2697 v3 was released over a year more recently than the FX-6350, and so the Xeon E5-2697 v3 is likely to have better levels of support, and will be more optimized for running the latest games.

Both CPUs exhibit very powerful performance, so it probably isn't worth upgrading from one to the other, as both are capable of running even the most demanding games at the highest settings (assuming they are accompanied by equivalently powerful GPUs).

The Xeon E5-2697 v3 has 8 more cores than the FX-6350. 14 cores is probably excessive if you mean to just run the latest games, as games are not yet able to harness this many cores. The cores in the FX-6350 is more than enough for gaming purposes. However, if you intend on running a server with the Xeon E5-2697 v3, it would seem to be a decent choice.

The Xeon E5-2697 v3 has 22 more threads than the FX-6350. The FX-6350 has one thread per physical core, whereas the Xeon E5-2697 v3 uses hyperthreading and has 2 logical threads per physical core.

Multiple threads are useful for improving the performance of multi-threaded applications. Additional cores and their accompanying thread will always be beneficial for multi-threaded applications. Hyperthreading will be beneficial for applications optimized for it, but it may slow others down. For games, the number of threads is largely irrelevant, as long as you have at least 2 cores (preferably 4), and hyperthreading can sometimes even hit performance.

More important for gaming than the number of cores and threads is the clock rate. Problematically, unless the two CPUs are from the same family, this can only serve as a general guide and nothing like an exact comparison, because the clock cycles per instruction (CPI) will vary so much.

The Xeon E5-2697 v3 and FX-6350 are not from the same family of CPUs, so their clock speeds are by no means directly comparable. Bear in mind, then, that while the FX-6350 has a 1.3 GHz faster frequency, this is not always an indicator that it will be superior in performance, despite frequency being crucial when trying to avoid GPU bottlenecking. In this case, however, the difference is probably a good indicator that the Xeon E5-2697 v3 is superior.

Aside from the clock rate, the next-most important CPU features for PC game performance are L2 and L3 cache size. Faster than RAM, the more cache available, the more data that can be stored for lightning-fast retrieval. L1 Cache is not usually an issue anymore for gaming, with most high-end CPUs eking out about the same L1 performance, and L2 is more important than L3 - but L3 is still important if you want to reach the highest levels of performance. Bear in mind that although it is better to have a larger cache, the larger it is, the higher the latency, so a balance has to be struck.

The FX-6350 has a 2560 KB bigger L2 cache than the Xeon E5-2697 v3, but on the other hand, it is the Xeon E5-2697 v3 that has a 27 MB bigger L3 cache than the FX-6350. In this case, the L2 size is probably what counts, so the FX-6350 is likely superior in this area.

The maximum Thermal Design Power is the power in Watts that the CPU will consume in the worst case scenario. The lithography is the semiconductor manufacturing technology being used to create the CPU - the smaller this is, the more transistors that can be fit into the CPU, and the closer the connections. For both the lithography and the TDP, it is the lower the better, because a lower number means a lower amount of power is necessary to run the CPU, and consequently a lower amount of heat is produced.

The FX-6350 has a 20 Watt lower Maximum TDP than the Xeon E5-2697 v3. However, the Xeon E5-2697 v3 was created with a 10 nm smaller manufacturing technology. Overall, by taking both into account, the Xeon E5-2697 v3 and the FX-6350 would appear to produce roughly the same amount of heat, and consume about the same amount of power.

Can I Run It

Check any game system requirements

CPU Core Details

CPU CodenameHaswell-EPVishera
MoBo SocketLGA 2011/Socket RSocket AM3+
Notebook CPUnono
Release Date01 Sep 201401 Oct 2012
CPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved

CPU Technical Specifications

CPU Cores14vs6
CPU Threads28vs6
Clock Speed2.6 GHzvs3.9 GHz
Turbo Frequency-vs4.2 GHz
Max TDP145 Wvs125 W
Lithography22 nmvs32 nm
Bit Width64 Bitvs64 Bit
Virtualization Technologynovsno
Comparison

CPU Cache and Memory

L1 Cache Size896 KBvs288 KB
L2 Cache Size3584 KBvs6144 KB
L3 Cache Size35 MBvs8 MB
Memory Channels-vs2
ECC Memory Supportnovsno
Comparison

CPU Graphics

Graphics
Base GPU Frequency-vs-
Max GPU Frequency-vs-
DirectX-vs-
Displays Supported-vs-
Comparison

CPU Package and Version Specifications

Package Size-vs-
Revision-vs-
PCIe Revision-vs-
PCIe Configurations-vs-

Gaming Performance Value

Performance Value

CPU Mini Review

Mini ReviewXeon E5-2697 v3 is an upcoming server processor based on the 22nm, Haxwell microarchitecture. FX-6350 is a high-end CPU based on the 32nm Bulldozer architecture.

It offers 6 Physical Cores (6 Logical), initially clocked at 3.9GHz, which may go up to 4.2GHz and 8MB of L3 Cache.
Among its many features, Turbo Core and Virtualization are activated and the clock multiplier is unlocked, meaning it can be overclocked easily.

The processor DOES NOT integrated any graphics. and has a rated board TDP of 125W.

It is a powerful Hexa Core whose performance is good. It's thus capable of running most applications smoothly without any problem.

Title

Body