FX-8370 vs Xeon E5-2620 v2

FX-8370 vs Xeon E5-2620 v2 Performance Spectrum

FX-8370

8 / 8

6,184

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX

Xeon E5-2620 v2

6 / 12

6,251

+1.1%

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 E5-2620 v2 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-8370 vs Xeon E5-2620 v2: 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

2014

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +6.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Stock Cooler), unlike Xeon E5-2620 v2.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (6,184 vs 6,251).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2620 v2, which brings 6 cores / 12 threads.
❌Launch MSRP is still $199 MSRP, while Xeon E5-2620 v2 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌56.3% higher power demand at 125W vs 80W.

Xeon E5-2620 v2

2013

Why buy it

✅+1.1% higher PassMark.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 6 cores / 12 threads.
✅Draws 80W instead of 125W, a 45W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than FX-8370 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike FX-8370.

Quick Answers

So, is FX-8370 better than Xeon E5-2620 v2?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5-2620 v2 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while FX-8370 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 E5-2620 v2 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.1% better PassMark, backed by 6 cores and 12 threads.

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

FX-8370 is the better buy right now. FX-8370 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $199 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 6.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Xeon E5-2620 v2 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 1.1% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (31.1 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

FX-8370 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2013). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

FX-8370 vs Xeon E5-2620 v2 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 E5-2620 v2

The Xeon E5-2620 v2 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge-EP (2013) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 15 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 80 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 6,251 points. Launch price was $417.

⚡

Processing Power

The FX-8370 packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon E5-2620 v2 offers 6 cores / 12 threads — the FX-8370 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the FX-8370 versus 2.6 GHz on the Xeon E5-2620 v2 — a 49.3% clock advantage for the FX-8370 (base: 4 GHz vs 2.1 GHz). The FX-8370 uses the Vishera (2012−2015) architecture (32 nm), while the Xeon E5-2620 v2 uses Ivy Bridge-EP (2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the FX-8370 scores 6,184 against the Xeon E5-2620 v2's 6,251 — a 1.1% lead for the Xeon E5-2620 v2.

Feature	FX-8370	Xeon E5-2620 v2
Cores / Threads	8 / 8+33%	6 / 12
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+65%	2.6 GHz
Base Clock	4 GHz+90%	2.1 GHz
L3 Cache	—	15 MB (total)
L2 Cache	8192 kB+3100%	256 kB (per core)
Process	32 nm	22 nm-31%
Architecture	Vishera (2012−2015)	Ivy Bridge-EP (2013)
PassMark	6,184	6,251+1%
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 E5-2620 v2 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	FX-8370	Xeon E5-2620 v2
Socket	AM3+	LGA2011
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
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 E5-2620 v2). Primary use case: FX-8370 targets Legacy Gaming. Direct competitor: FX-8370 rivals Core i5-6400.