A6-9220 vs Xeon E3110

A6-9220 vs Xeon E3110 Performance Spectrum

A6-9220

2 / 2

1,307

+0.9%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Xeon E3110

1,295

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.

A6-9220 vs Xeon E3110 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.

A6-9220 vs Xeon E3110: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A6-9220

2016

Why buy it

✅Draws 1W instead of 65W, a 64W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (8 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with AMD Radeon R4, while Xeon E3110 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Xeon E3110

2008

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,295 vs 1,307).
❌Launch MSRP is still $214 MSRP, while A6-9220 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌6400% higher power demand at 65W vs 1W.
❌No integrated graphics, while A6-9220 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is A6-9220 better than Xeon E3110?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E3110 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while A6-9220 is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, A6-9220 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 2.3% 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, A6-9220 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.9% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

A6-9220 is still the faster CPU overall, but Xeon E3110 is easier to justify if budget matters more than peak performance. A6-9220 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $214 MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Xeon E3110 is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (6.1 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), which is why it can still make sense for tighter-budget builds on paper.

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

A6-9220 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2008). That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A6-9220 vs Xeon E3110 Technical Specifications

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

A6-9220

The A6-9220 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 2.9 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: BGA. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,307 points. Launch price was $70.

Xeon E3110

The Xeon E3110 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. Base frequency: 3 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB L2 Cache. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,295 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The A6-9220 is built on the Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) architecture. In PassMark, the A6-9220 scores 1,307 against the Xeon E3110's 1,295 — a 0.9% lead for the A6-9220.

Feature	A6-9220	Xeon E3110
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	—
Boost Clock	2.9 GHz	—
Base Clock	2.5 GHz	3 GHz+20%
L3 Cache	—	6 MB L2 Cache
L2 Cache	1 MB	—
Process	28 nm-38%	45 nm
Architecture	Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)	—
PassMark	1,307	1,295