FX-9830P vs Xeon W3570

FX-9830P vs Xeon W3570 Performance Spectrum

FX-9830P

4 / 4

3,298

+0.9%

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Xeon W3570

4 / 8

3,267

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 W3570 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 W3570: 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

✅+0.9% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $849 less on MSRP ($150 MSRP vs $999 MSRP).
✅Delivers 572.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 22.0 vs 3.3 PassMark/$ ($150 MSRP vs $999 MSRP).
✅Draws 35W instead of 130W, a 95W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon W3570 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W3570, which brings 4 cores / 8 threads.

Xeon W3570

2009

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +5.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 4 cores / 8 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,267 vs 3,298).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 3.3 vs 22.0 PassMark/$ ($999 MSRP vs $150 MSRP).
❌271.4% higher power demand at 130W vs 35W.

Quick Answers

So, is FX-9830P better than Xeon W3570?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon W3570 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 streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, FX-9830P is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.9% 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 $849 cheaper on MSRP at $150 MSRP versus $999 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.9% better PassMark. The compromise is that Xeon W3570 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 5.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 572.3% better value on MSRP (22.0 vs 3.3 PassMark/$), 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 2009) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 4/8. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

FX-9830P vs Xeon W3570 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 W3570

The Xeon W3570 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 March 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Bloomfield (2008−2010) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.46 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1366. Thermal design power (TDP): 130 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,267 points. Launch price was $480.

⚡

Processing Power

The FX-9830P packs 4 cores / 4 threads, matching the Xeon W3570's 4 cores. Boost clocks reach 3.7 GHz on the FX-9830P versus 3.46 GHz on the Xeon W3570 — a 6.7% clock advantage for the FX-9830P (base: 3 GHz vs 3.2 GHz). The FX-9830P uses the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture (28 nm), while the Xeon W3570 uses Bloomfield (2008−2010) (45 nm). In PassMark, the FX-9830P scores 3,298 against the Xeon W3570's 3,267 — a 0.9% lead for the FX-9830P.

Feature	FX-9830P	Xeon W3570
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 8
Boost Clock	3.7 GHz+7%	3.46 GHz
Base Clock	3 GHz	3.2 GHz+7%
L3 Cache	—	8 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB (per module)+300%	256 kB (per core)
Process	28 nm-38%	45 nm
Architecture	Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)	Bloomfield (2008−2010)
PassMark	3,298	3,267

🧠

Memory & Platform

The FX-9830P uses the FP4 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon W3570 uses LGA1366 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	FX-9830P	Xeon W3570
Socket	FP4	LGA1366
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the FX-9830P was priced at $150, while the Xeon W3570 came in at $999. On launch pricing ($150 vs $999), FX-9830P was $849 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the FX-9830P delivers 22.0 pts/$ vs 3.3 pts/$ for the Xeon W3570 — making the FX-9830P the 148.2% better value option.

Feature	FX-9830P	Xeon W3570
MSRP	$150-85%	$999
Performance per Dollar	22.0+567%	3.3
Release Date	2016	2009

Search FX-9830P on Amazon

Search Xeon W3570 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.