A6-9500E vs Xeon L5335

A6-9500E vs Xeon L5335 Performance Spectrum

A6-9500E

2 / 2

1,741

+0.2%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Xeon L5335

4 / 4

1,737

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.

A6-9500E vs Xeon L5335 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.

A6-9500E vs Xeon L5335: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A6-9500E

2017

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 35W instead of 50W, a 15W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (8 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with AMD Radeon R5, while Xeon L5335 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon L5335, which brings 4 cores / 4 threads.

Xeon L5335

2007

Why buy it

✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 4 cores / 4 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than A6-9500E across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (1,737 vs 1,741).
❌Launch MSRP is still $380 MSRP, while A6-9500E mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌42.9% higher power demand at 50W vs 35W.
❌No integrated graphics, while A6-9500E can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is A6-9500E better than Xeon L5335?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon L5335 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while A6-9500E is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, A6-9500E is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 3.8% 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, A6-9500E is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

A6-9500E is still the faster CPU overall, but Xeon L5335 is easier to justify if budget matters more than peak performance. A6-9500E comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $380 MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Xeon L5335 is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (4.6 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), which is why it can still make sense for tighter-budget builds on paper.

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

A6-9500E makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2007) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A6-9500E vs Xeon L5335 Technical Specifications

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

A6-9500E

The A6-9500E is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1024 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2400. Passmark benchmark score: 1,741 points. Launch price was $70.

Xeon L5335

The Xeon L5335 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 13 August 2007 (18 years ago). It is based on the Clovertown (2006−2007) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB L2 Cache. L2 cache: 4 MB (total). Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: LGA771. Thermal design power (TDP): 50 Watt. Memory support: DDR2, DDR3 Depends on motherboard. Passmark benchmark score: 1,737 points. Launch price was $380.

⚡

Processing Power

The A6-9500E packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Xeon L5335 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Xeon L5335 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.4 GHz on the A6-9500E versus 2 GHz on the Xeon L5335 — a 51.9% clock advantage for the A6-9500E (base: 3 GHz vs 2 GHz). The A6-9500E uses the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture (28 nm), while the Xeon L5335 uses Clovertown (2006−2007) (65 nm). In PassMark, the A6-9500E scores 1,741 against the Xeon L5335's 1,737 — a 0.2% lead for the A6-9500E. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A6-9500E vs 8 MB L2 Cache on the Xeon L5335.

Feature	A6-9500E	Xeon L5335
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	3.4 GHz+70%	2 GHz
Base Clock	3 GHz+50%	2 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	8 MB L2 Cache
L2 Cache	1024 kB	4 MB (total)+300%
Process	28 nm-57%	65 nm
Architecture	Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)	Clovertown (2006−2007)
PassMark	1,741	1,737