FX-8350 vs Xeon E3-1515M v5

FX-8350 vs Xeon E3-1515M v5 Performance Spectrum

FX-8350

8 / 8

5,936

+0.2%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX

Xeon E3-1515M v5

4 / 8

5,925

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.

FX-8350 vs Xeon E3-1515M v5 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-8350 vs Xeon E3-1515M v5: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

FX-8350

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +13.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E3-1515M v5, which brings 4 cores / 8 threads and 16 PCIe lanes.
❌Launch MSRP is still $199 MSRP, while Xeon E3-1515M v5 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌177.8% higher power demand at 125W vs 45W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Xeon E3-1515M v5 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Xeon E3-1515M v5

2016

Why buy it

✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 4 cores / 8 threads, plus 16 PCIe lanes vs 0.
✅Draws 45W instead of 125W, a 80W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Iris Pro Graphics P580, while FX-8350 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than FX-8350 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (5,925 vs 5,936).

Quick Answers

So, is FX-8350 better than Xeon E3-1515M v5?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E3-1515M v5 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while FX-8350 is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, FX-8350 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 13.0% 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, FX-8350 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 8 threads.

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

FX-8350 is the better buy right now. FX-8350 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $199 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 13.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (29.8 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Xeon E3-1515M v5 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2012). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

FX-8350 vs Xeon E3-1515M v5 Technical Specifications

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

FX-8350

The FX-8350 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 23 October 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Vishera (2012−2015) architecture. It features 8 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 4 GHz, with boost up to 4.2 GHz. L2 cache: 8192 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: AM3+. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 5,936 points. Launch price was $199.

Xeon E3-1515M v5

The Xeon E3-1515M v5 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 24 January 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Skylake-H (2015−2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1440. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 5,925 points. Launch price was $489.

⚡

Processing Power

The FX-8350 packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon E3-1515M v5 offers 4 cores / 8 threads — the FX-8350 has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.2 GHz on the FX-8350 versus 3.7 GHz on the Xeon E3-1515M v5 — a 12.7% clock advantage for the FX-8350 (base: 4 GHz vs 2.8 GHz). The FX-8350 uses the Vishera (2012−2015) architecture (32 nm), while the Xeon E3-1515M v5 uses Skylake-H (2015−2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the FX-8350 scores 5,936 against the Xeon E3-1515M v5's 5,925 — a 0.2% lead for the FX-8350.

Feature	FX-8350	Xeon E3-1515M v5
Cores / Threads	8 / 8+100%	4 / 8
Boost Clock	4.2 GHz+14%	3.7 GHz
Base Clock	4 GHz+43%	2.8 GHz
L3 Cache	—	8 MB (total)
L2 Cache	8192 kB+3100%	256 kB (per core)
Process	32 nm	14 nm-56%
Architecture	Vishera (2012−2015)	Skylake-H (2015−2016)
PassMark	5,936	5,925
Geekbench 6 Single	—	1,017

🧠

Memory & Platform

The FX-8350 uses the AM3+ socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Xeon E3-1515M v5 uses BGA1440 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	FX-8350	Xeon E3-1515M v5
Socket	AM3+	BGA1440
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	—	DDR4-2133
Max RAM Capacity	—	64 GB
RAM Channels	—	2
ECC Support	—	Yes
PCIe Lanes	—	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (FX-8350) / VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Xeon E3-1515M v5). The Xeon E3-1515M v5 includes integrated graphics (Iris Pro Graphics P580), while the FX-8350 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Xeon E3-1515M v5 targets Productivity. Direct competitor: Xeon E3-1515M v5 rivals Core i7-6700HQ.