A12-9800 vs Xeon L5638

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.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.

A12-9800

2017

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (8 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon R7, while Xeon L5638 needs a discrete GPU.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon L5638.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,695 vs 3,707).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon L5638, which brings 6 cores / 12 threads.

Xeon L5638

2010

Why buy it

✅+0.3% higher PassMark.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 6 cores / 12 threads.
✅Draws 60W instead of 65W, a 5W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌No integrated graphics, while A12-9800 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike A12-9800.

A12-9800

2017

Xeon L5638

2010

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (8 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon R7, while Xeon L5638 needs a discrete GPU.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon L5638.

Why buy it

✅+0.3% higher PassMark.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 6 cores / 12 threads.
✅Draws 60W instead of 65W, a 5W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,695 vs 3,707).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon L5638, which brings 6 cores / 12 threads.

Trade-offs

❌No integrated graphics, while A12-9800 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike A12-9800.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon L5638 better than A12-9800?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon L5638 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while A12-9800 is the better mainstream desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and day-to-day practicality.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon L5638 is the better fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 6 cores and 12 threads.

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

Xeon L5638 still looks like the safer overall buy. Xeon L5638 is at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it gives you 0.3% better PassMark.

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

A12-9800 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2010). That makes it the safer long-term pick.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

A12-9800 Benchmark Check

Xeon L5638 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	A12-9800	Xeon L5638
1080p
low	92 FPS	93 FPS
medium	92 FPS	93 FPS
high	92 FPS	93 FPS
ultra	92 FPS	87 FPS
1440p
low	92 FPS	93 FPS
medium	92 FPS	93 FPS
high	92 FPS	86 FPS
ultra	76 FPS	70 FPS
4K
low	65 FPS	61 FPS
medium	58 FPS	55 FPS
high	45 FPS	43 FPS
ultra	36 FPS	34 FPS

Open A12-9800 Open Xeon L5638

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	A12-9800	Xeon L5638
1080p
low	92 FPS	93 FPS
medium	92 FPS	93 FPS
high	92 FPS	88 FPS
ultra	92 FPS	69 FPS
1440p
low	92 FPS	93 FPS
medium	92 FPS	83 FPS
high	92 FPS	78 FPS
ultra	92 FPS	64 FPS
4K
low	92 FPS	83 FPS
medium	92 FPS	74 FPS
high	92 FPS	65 FPS
ultra	92 FPS	46 FPS

Open A12-9800 Open Xeon L5638

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	A12-9800	Xeon L5638
1080p
low	92 FPS	93 FPS
medium	92 FPS	93 FPS
high	92 FPS	93 FPS
ultra	92 FPS	93 FPS
1440p
low	92 FPS	93 FPS
medium	92 FPS	93 FPS
high	92 FPS	93 FPS
ultra	92 FPS	93 FPS
4K
low	92 FPS	93 FPS
medium	92 FPS	93 FPS
high	92 FPS	93 FPS
ultra	92 FPS	93 FPS

Open A12-9800 Open Xeon L5638

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	A12-9800	Xeon L5638
1080p
low	92 FPS	93 FPS
medium	92 FPS	93 FPS
high	92 FPS	93 FPS
ultra	92 FPS	93 FPS
1440p
low	92 FPS	93 FPS
medium	92 FPS	93 FPS
high	92 FPS	93 FPS
ultra	92 FPS	93 FPS
4K
low	92 FPS	93 FPS
medium	92 FPS	93 FPS
high	92 FPS	93 FPS
ultra	92 FPS	93 FPS

Open A12-9800 Open Xeon L5638

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of A12-9800 and Xeon L5638

A12-9800

The A12-9800 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 27 July 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.8 GHz, with boost up to 4.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2400. Passmark benchmark score: 3,695 points. Launch price was $139.

Xeon L5638

The Xeon L5638 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 16 March 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Westmere-EP (2010−2011) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1366. Thermal design power (TDP): 60 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,707 points. Launch price was $90.

⚡

Processing Power

The A12-9800 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Xeon L5638 offers 6 cores / 12 threads — the Xeon L5638 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.2 GHz on the A12-9800 versus 2.4 GHz on the Xeon L5638 — a 54.5% clock advantage for the A12-9800 (base: 3.8 GHz vs 2 GHz). The A12-9800 uses the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture (28 nm), while the Xeon L5638 uses Westmere-EP (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the A12-9800 scores 3,695 against the Xeon L5638's 3,707 — a 0.3% lead for the Xeon L5638. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A12-9800 vs 12 MB (total) on the Xeon L5638.

Feature	A12-9800	Xeon L5638
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	6 / 12+50%
Boost Clock	4.2 GHz+75%	2.4 GHz
Base Clock	3.8 GHz+90%	2 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	12 MB (total)
L2 Cache	2048 kB+700%	256 kB (per core)
Process	28 nm-13%	32 nm
Architecture	Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)	Westmere-EP (2010−2011)
PassMark	3,695	3,707
Geekbench 6 Single	635	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A12-9800 uses the AM4 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon L5638 uses LGA1366 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	A12-9800	Xeon L5638
Socket	AM4	LGA1366
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 4.0+33%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2400	—
Max RAM Capacity	64 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	8	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: AMD-V (A12-9800) / not specified (Xeon L5638). The A12-9800 includes integrated graphics (Radeon R7), while the Xeon L5638 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A12-9800 targets Budget. Direct competitor: A12-9800 rivals Pentium G4600.