FX-4100 vs Xeon E5-2407

FX-4100 vs Xeon E5-2407 Performance Spectrum

FX-4100

4 / 4

2,630

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Xeon E5-2407

4 / 8

2,659

+1.1%

Core Duo T2400

Pentium Dual Core T2390

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.

FX-4100 vs Xeon E5-2407 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.

FX-4100 vs Xeon E5-2407: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

FX-4100

2011

Why buy it

✅Costs $135 less on MSRP ($115 MSRP vs $250 MSRP).
✅Delivers 115.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 22.9 vs 10.6 PassMark/$ ($115 MSRP vs $250 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,630 vs 2,659).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 10 MB).
❌18.8% higher power demand at 95W vs 80W.

Xeon E5-2407

2012

Why buy it

✅+1.1% higher PassMark.
✅+25% larger total L3 cache (10 MB vs 8 MB).
✅Draws 80W instead of 95W, a 15W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.6 vs 22.9 PassMark/$ ($250 MSRP vs $115 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon E5-2407 better than FX-4100?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5-2407 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while FX-4100 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 E5-2407 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.1% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 25% larger total L3 cache (10 MB vs 8 MB).

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

Xeon E5-2407 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Xeon E5-2407 comes in 117.4% more expensive on MSRP at $250 MSRP versus $115 MSRP, and it still gives you 1.1% better PassMark. FX-4100 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2011 platform. Even with 115.0% better value on paper (22.9 vs 10.6 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on AM3+.

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

Xeon E5-2407 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2011), 25% larger total L3 cache (10 MB vs 8 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

FX-4100 vs Xeon E5-2407 Technical Specifications

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

FX-4100

The FX-4100 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 12 October 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Zambezi (2011−2012) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 8192 kB. L2 cache: 4096 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: AM3+. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,630 points. Launch price was $69.

Xeon E5-2407

The Xeon E5-2407 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 14 May 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge-EN (2012) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 10240 kB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1356. Thermal design power (TDP): 80 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,659 points. Launch price was $335.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the FX-4100 and Xeon E5-2407 share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.8 GHz on the FX-4100 versus 2.2 GHz on the Xeon E5-2407 — a 53.3% clock advantage for the FX-4100 (base: 3.6 GHz vs 2.2 GHz). The FX-4100 uses the Zambezi (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Xeon E5-2407 uses Sandy Bridge-EN (2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the FX-4100 scores 2,630 against the Xeon E5-2407's 2,659 — a 1.1% lead for the Xeon E5-2407. L3 cache: 8192 kB on the FX-4100 vs 10240 kB (total) on the Xeon E5-2407.

Feature	FX-4100	Xeon E5-2407
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 4
Boost Clock	3.8 GHz+73%	2.2 GHz
Base Clock	3.6 GHz+64%	2.2 GHz
L3 Cache	8192 kB	10240 kB (total)+25%
L2 Cache	4096 kB+1500%	256 kB (per core)
Process	32 nm	32 nm
Architecture	Zambezi (2011−2012)	Sandy Bridge-EN (2012)
PassMark	2,630	2,659+1%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The FX-4100 uses the AM3+ socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Xeon E5-2407 uses LGA1356 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	FX-4100	Xeon E5-2407
Socket	AM3+	LGA1356
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the FX-4100 was priced at $115, while the Xeon E5-2407 came in at $250. On launch pricing ($115 vs $250), FX-4100 was $135 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the FX-4100 delivers 22.9 pts/$ vs 10.6 pts/$ for the Xeon E5-2407 — making the FX-4100 the 73% better value option.

Feature	FX-4100	Xeon E5-2407
MSRP	$115-54%	$250
Performance per Dollar	22.9+116%	10.6
Release Date	2011	2012

Search FX-4100 on Amazon

Search Xeon E5-2407 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.