A10-5800K vs Xeon X3460

A10-5800K vs Xeon X3460 Performance Spectrum

A10-5800K

4 / 4

2,963

+0.3%

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Xeon X3460

4 / 8

2,955

0.0%

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

A10-5800K vs Xeon X3460 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

A10-5800K vs Xeon X3460: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

A10-5800K

2012

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 7660D, while Xeon X3460 needs a discrete GPU.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon X3460.

Trade-offs

❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon X3460, which brings 4 cores / 8 threads.

Xeon X3460

2009

Why buy it

✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 4 cores / 8 threads.
✅Draws 95W instead of 100W, a 5W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,955 vs 2,963).
❌Launch MSRP is still $316 MSRP, while A10-5800K mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No integrated graphics, while A10-5800K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike A10-5800K.

Quick Answers

So, is A10-5800K better than Xeon X3460?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon X3460 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while A10-5800K is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, A10-5800K is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.6% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, A10-5800K is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

A10-5800K is still the faster CPU overall, but Xeon X3460 is easier to justify if budget matters more than peak performance. A10-5800K comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $316 MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Xeon X3460 is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (9.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), which is why it can still make sense for tighter-budget builds on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

A10-5800K makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2009) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 4/8. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A10-5800K vs Xeon X3460 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

A10-5800K

The A10-5800K is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2 October 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Trinity (2012−2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.8 GHz, with boost up to 4.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM2. Thermal design power (TDP): 100 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,963 points. Launch price was $122.

Xeon X3460

The Xeon X3460 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 8 September 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Lynnfield (2009−2010) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 3.46 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1156. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-800, DDR3-1066, DDR3-1333. Passmark benchmark score: 2,955 points. Launch price was $316.

⚡

Processing Power

The A10-5800K packs 4 cores / 4 threads, matching the Xeon X3460's 4 cores. Boost clocks reach 4.2 GHz on the A10-5800K versus 3.46 GHz on the Xeon X3460 — a 19.3% clock advantage for the A10-5800K (base: 3.8 GHz vs 2.8 GHz). The A10-5800K uses the Trinity (2012−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Xeon X3460 uses Lynnfield (2009−2010) (45 nm). In PassMark, the A10-5800K scores 2,963 against the Xeon X3460's 2,955 — a 0.3% lead for the A10-5800K. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A10-5800K vs 8 MB (total) on the Xeon X3460.

Feature	A10-5800K	Xeon X3460
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 8
Boost Clock	4.2 GHz+21%	3.46 GHz
Base Clock	3.8 GHz+36%	2.8 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	8 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)+300%	256 kB (per core)
Process	32 nm-29%	45 nm
Architecture	Trinity (2012−2013)	Lynnfield (2009−2010)
PassMark	2,963	2,955
Geekbench 6 Single	461	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A10-5800K uses the FM2 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Xeon X3460 uses LGA1156 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	A10-5800K	Xeon X3460
Socket	FM2	LGA1156
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1866	—
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: AMD-V (A10-5800K) / not specified (Xeon X3460). The A10-5800K includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 7660D), while the Xeon X3460 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A10-5800K targets Budget. Direct competitor: A10-5800K rivals Core i3-3225.