
FX-8370

Xeon E5-2440
FX-8370 vs Xeon E5-2440 Performance Spectrum
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-8370 vs Xeon E5-2440 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.

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Valorant

Among Us

Apex Legends

ARC Raiders

Baldur's Gate 3

Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
FX-8370 vs Xeon E5-2440: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.
FX-8370
2014Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +16.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $529 less on MSRP ($199 MSRP vs $728 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 271.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 31.1 vs 8.4 PassMark/$ ($199 MSRP vs $728 MSRP).
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Stock Cooler), unlike Xeon E5-2440.
Trade-offs
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2440, which brings 6 cores / 12 threads.
- ❌31.6% higher power demand at 125W vs 95W.
Xeon E5-2440
2012Why buy it
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 6 cores / 12 threads.
- ✅Draws 95W instead of 125W, a 30W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than FX-8370 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (6,091 vs 6,184).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 8.4 vs 31.1 PassMark/$ ($728 MSRP vs $199 MSRP).
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike FX-8370.
Quick Answers
So, is FX-8370 better than Xeon E5-2440?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
FX-8370 vs Xeon E5-2440 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

FX-8370
The FX-8370 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2 September 2014 (11 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 4.3 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: 6,184 points. Launch price was $199.

Xeon E5-2440
The Xeon E5-2440 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 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.9 GHz. L3 cache: 15360 kB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1356. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 6,091 points. Launch price was $295.
Processing Power
The FX-8370 packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon E5-2440 offers 6 cores / 12 threads — the FX-8370 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the FX-8370 versus 2.9 GHz on the Xeon E5-2440 — a 38.9% clock advantage for the FX-8370 (base: 4 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The FX-8370 uses the Vishera (2012−2015) architecture (32 nm), while the Xeon E5-2440 uses Sandy Bridge-EN (2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the FX-8370 scores 6,184 against the Xeon E5-2440's 6,091 — a 1.5% lead for the FX-8370.
| Feature | FX-8370 | Xeon E5-2440 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 8 / 8+33% | 6 / 12 |
| Boost Clock | 4.3 GHz+48% | 2.9 GHz |
| Base Clock | 4 GHz+67% | 2.4 GHz |
| L3 Cache | — | 15360 kB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 8192 kB+3100% | 256 kB (per core) |
| Process | 32 nm | 32 nm |
| Architecture | Vishera (2012−2015) | Sandy Bridge-EN (2012) |
| PassMark | 6,184+2% | 6,091 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 3,800 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 520 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 2,050 | — |
Memory & Platform
The FX-8370 uses the AM3+ socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Xeon E5-2440 uses LGA1356 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | FX-8370 | Xeon E5-2440 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | AM3+ | LGA1356 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1866 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 32 GB | — |
| RAM Channels | 2 | — |
| ECC Support | No | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | — |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: AMD-V (FX-8370) / not specified (Xeon E5-2440). Primary use case: FX-8370 targets Legacy Gaming. Direct competitor: FX-8370 rivals Core i5-6400.
| Feature | FX-8370 | Xeon E5-2440 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | — |
| IGPU Model | None | — |
| Unlocked | Yes | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | — |
| Target Use | Legacy Gaming | — |
Value Analysis
At launch, the FX-8370 was priced at $199, while the Xeon E5-2440 came in at $728. On launch pricing ($199 vs $728), FX-8370 was $529 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the FX-8370 delivers 31.1 pts/$ vs 8.4 pts/$ for the Xeon E5-2440 — making the FX-8370 the 115.1% better value option.
| Feature | FX-8370 | Xeon E5-2440 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $199-73% | $728 |
| Performance per Dollar | 31.1+270% | 8.4 |
| Release Date | 2014 | 2012 |
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.
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
















