Athlon II X4 740 vs Xeon E5607

Athlon II X4 740 vs Xeon E5607 Performance Spectrum

Athlon II X4 740

4 / 4

2,677

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Xeon E5607

4 / 4

2,686

+0.3%

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.

Athlon II X4 740 vs Xeon E5607 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.

Athlon II X4 740 vs Xeon E5607: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Athlon II X4 740

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +6.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $64 less on MSRP ($71 MSRP vs $135 MSRP).
✅Delivers 89.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 37.7 vs 19.9 PassMark/$ ($71 MSRP vs $135 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 80W, a 15W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,677 vs 2,686).

Xeon E5607

2011

Why buy it

✅+0.3% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Athlon II X4 740 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 19.9 vs 37.7 PassMark/$ ($135 MSRP vs $71 MSRP).
❌23.1% higher power demand at 80W vs 65W.

Quick Answers

So, is Athlon II X4 740 better than Xeon E5607?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5607 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Athlon II X4 740 is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon E5607 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?

Athlon II X4 740 is the better buy right now. Athlon II X4 740 comes in $64 cheaper on MSRP at $71 MSRP versus $135 MSRP, and it still gives you a 6.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Xeon E5607 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.3% better PassMark. It is also 89.5% better value on MSRP (37.7 vs 19.9 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Athlon II X4 740 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Athlon II X4 740 vs Xeon E5607 Technical Specifications

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

Athlon II X4 740

The Athlon II X4 740 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 1 October 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Piledriver architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L2 cache: 4 MB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM2. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 watt. Passmark benchmark score: 2,677 points. Launch price was $71.

Xeon E5607

The Xeon E5607 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 14 February 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Westmere-EP (2010−2011) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.26 GHz, with boost up to 0.27 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1366. Thermal design power (TDP): 80 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,686 points. Launch price was $135.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Athlon II X4 740 and Xeon E5607 share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.7 GHz on the Athlon II X4 740 versus 0.27 GHz on the Xeon E5607 — a 172.8% clock advantage for the Athlon II X4 740 (base: 3.2 GHz vs 2.26 GHz). The Athlon II X4 740 uses the Piledriver architecture (32 nm), while the Xeon E5607 uses Westmere-EP (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II X4 740 scores 2,677 against the Xeon E5607's 2,686 — a 0.3% lead for the Xeon E5607.

Feature	Athlon II X4 740	Xeon E5607
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 4
Boost Clock	3.7 GHz+1270%	0.27 GHz
Base Clock	3.2 GHz+42%	2.26 GHz
L3 Cache	—	8 MB (total)
L2 Cache	4 MB+1500%	256 kB (per core)
Process	32 nm	32 nm
Architecture	Piledriver	Westmere-EP (2010−2011)
PassMark	2,677	2,686

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon II X4 740 uses the FM2 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Xeon E5607 uses LGA1366 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Athlon II X4 740	Xeon E5607
Socket	FM2	LGA1366
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1866	—
Max RAM Capacity	64 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Athlon II X4 740 was priced at $71, while the Xeon E5607 came in at $135. On launch pricing ($71 vs $135), Athlon II X4 740 was $64 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon II X4 740 delivers 37.7 pts/$ vs 19.9 pts/$ for the Xeon E5607 — making the Athlon II X4 740 the 61.8% better value option.

Feature	Athlon II X4 740	Xeon E5607
MSRP	$71-47%	$135
Performance per Dollar	37.7+89%	19.9
Release Date	2012	2011

Search Athlon II X4 740 on Amazon

Search Xeon E5607 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.