FX-9830P vs Xeon E5-2407 v2

FX-9830P vs Xeon E5-2407 v2 Performance Spectrum

FX-9830P

4 / 4

3,298

+0.8%

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Xeon E5-2407 v2

4 / 4

3,272

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-9830P vs Xeon E5-2407 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-9830P vs Xeon E5-2407 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-9830P

2016

Why buy it

✅Costs $100 less on MSRP ($150 MSRP vs $250 MSRP).
✅Delivers 68.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 22.0 vs 13.1 PassMark/$ ($150 MSRP vs $250 MSRP).
✅Draws 35W instead of 80W, a 45W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Xeon E5-2407 v2

2013

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,272 vs 3,298).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 13.1 vs 22.0 PassMark/$ ($250 MSRP vs $150 MSRP).
❌128.6% higher power demand at 80W vs 35W.

Quick Answers

So, is FX-9830P better than Xeon E5-2407 v2?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5-2407 v2 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while FX-9830P 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-9830P is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 2.0% 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-9830P is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.8% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

FX-9830P is the better buy right now. FX-9830P comes in $100 cheaper on MSRP at $150 MSRP versus $250 MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 68.0% better value on MSRP (22.0 vs 13.1 PassMark/$), 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-9830P makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2013) 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-9830P vs Xeon E5-2407 v2 Technical Specifications

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

FX-9830P

The FX-9830P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 31 May 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB (per module). Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FP4. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 3,298 points. Launch price was $69.

Xeon E5-2407 v2

The Xeon E5-2407 v2 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge-EN (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 10 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1356. Thermal design power (TDP): 80 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,272 points. Launch price was $476.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the FX-9830P and Xeon E5-2407 v2 share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.7 GHz on the FX-9830P versus 2.4 GHz on the Xeon E5-2407 v2 — a 42.6% clock advantage for the FX-9830P (base: 3 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The FX-9830P uses the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture (28 nm), while the Xeon E5-2407 v2 uses Ivy Bridge-EN (2013−2014) (22 nm). In PassMark, the FX-9830P scores 3,298 against the Xeon E5-2407 v2's 3,272 — a 0.8% lead for the FX-9830P.

Feature	FX-9830P	Xeon E5-2407 v2
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 4
Boost Clock	3.7 GHz+54%	2.4 GHz
Base Clock	3 GHz+25%	2.4 GHz
L3 Cache	—	10 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB (per module)+300%	256 kB (per core)
Process	28 nm	22 nm-21%
Architecture	Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)	Ivy Bridge-EN (2013−2014)
PassMark	3,298	3,272

🧠

Memory & Platform

The FX-9830P uses the FP4 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E5-2407 v2 uses LGA1356 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	FX-9830P	Xeon E5-2407 v2
Socket	FP4	LGA1356
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the FX-9830P was priced at $150, while the Xeon E5-2407 v2 came in at $250. On launch pricing ($150 vs $250), FX-9830P was $100 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the FX-9830P delivers 22.0 pts/$ vs 13.1 pts/$ for the Xeon E5-2407 v2 — making the FX-9830P the 50.7% better value option.

Feature	FX-9830P	Xeon E5-2407 v2
MSRP	$150-40%	$250
Performance per Dollar	22.0+68%	13.1
Release Date	2016	2013

Search FX-9830P on Amazon

Search Xeon E5-2407 v2 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.