0 Comments
|
|
5.4 Out of 10 | | by Tech Radar (Mar, 2012) by Tech Radar (Mar, 2012) |
|
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of the Intel Xeon E5-2687W among all CPUs
Performance | |
Benchmark performance using all cores | |
PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more |
Single-core Performance | |
Individual core benchmark performance | |
PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more |
Integrated Graphics | |
Integrated GPU performance for graphics | |
Sky Diver and Cloud Gate |
Integrated Graphics (OpenCL) | |
Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing | |
CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more |
Performance per Watt | |
How efficiently does the processor use electricity? | |
Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more |
Value | |
Are you paying a premium for performance? | |
Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more |
5.4 | CPUBoss Score |
Combination of all six facets | |
Benchmarks Real world tests of the Intel Xeon E5-2687W
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
PassMark (Single Core)
Reviews Word on the street for the Intel Xeon E5-2687W
![]() | 6.0 |
|
---|
What People Are Saying Give it to me straight
Socket Type
by Tech Radar (Mar, 2012)As we'll see, that's a serious blow to the Xeon's enthusiast credentials, but not unexpected from a chip designed for stability in a workstation environment.
by Tech Radar (Mar, 2012)The enormous price of the Intel Xeon 2687W may make sense in the former, but it's far too rich for the latter, especially when you consider the lack of overclocking support.
by Tech Radar (Mar, 2012)With the arrival of the new Intel Xeon 2687W eight-core monster, we're getting a taste of what we've been missing.
Socket
by Tech Radar (Mar, 2012)The new Intel Xeon 2687W may not be targeted directly at the desktop, but it will drop straight into any Intel X79-based PC motherboard with the LGA2011 socket and fire up like a trooper.
by Tech Radar (Mar, 2012)As expected it's just not cost effective on the desktop, but still puts into question why exactly we don't have a full eight-core desktop processor in the desktop Sandy Bridge E family.
by Tech Radar (Mar, 2012)The LGA 2011 socket will still be used when Ivy Bridge E tips up.
Multicore
by Tech Radar (Mar, 2012)Once you've paid for it, eight cores is what you should get.
by Tech Radar (Mar, 2012)But this time with all eight cores enabled instead of six.
by Tech Radar (Mar, 2012)Turns out, you can have all the cores enabled without winding down the frequency significantly.
Type of CPU
by Tech Radar (Mar, 2012)That said, there's not much evidence the extra cache memory has an impact on the desktop.
by Tech Radar (Mar, 2012)If you can afford the asking price, therefore, it is an option for a desktop PC.
by Tech Radar (Mar, 2012)It's a workstation and server chip.
Performance
by Tech Radar (Mar, 2012)The most immediately revealing metrics are the single and multi-threaded Cinebench results.
by Tech Radar (Mar, 2012)The pseudo eight-core AMD FX 8150 chip isn't even in the same post code for performance.
by Tech Radar (Mar, 2012)But it's not a million miles away in several benchmarks, including professional rendering, video encoding and database crunching.
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary
Clock speed | 3.1 GHz |
---|---|
Turbo clock speed | 3.8 GHz |
Cores | Octa core |
Socket type | LGA 2011 |
features
Has a NX bit | Yes |
---|---|
Supports trusted computing | Yes |
Has virtualization support | Yes |
Instruction set extensions |
|
Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes |
power consumption
TDP | 150W |
---|---|
Annual home energy cost | 36.13 $/year |
Annual commercial energy cost | 131.4 $/year |
Performance per watt | 7.68 pt/W |
Typical power consumption | 121.88W |
memory controller
Memory controller | Built-in |
---|---|
Memory type |
|
Channels | Quad Channel |
Supports ECC | Yes |
Maximum bandwidth | 51,200 MB/s |
Maximum memory size | 262,144 MB |
details
Architecture | x86-64 |
---|---|
Threads | 16 threads |
L2 cache | 2 MB |
L2 cache per core | 0.25 MB/core |
L3 cache | 20 MB |
L3 cache per core | 2.5 MB/core |
Manufacture process | 32 nm |
Max CPUs | 2 |
Clock multiplier | 38 |
Voltage range | 0.6 - 1.35V |
Operating temperature | Unknown - 67°C |
overclocking
Overclock popularity | 8 |
---|---|
Overclocked clock speed | 3.87 GHz |
Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 3.41 GHz |
Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.87 GHz |
integrated graphics
GPU | None |
---|---|
Label | None |
Latest DirectX | None |
Number of displays supported | None |
GPU clock speed | None |
Turbo clock speed | None |
3DMark06 | None |
bus
Architecture | QPI |
---|---|
Number of links | 2 |
Data rate | 64,000 MB/s |
Transfer rate | 8,000 MT/s |
Clock speed | 4,000 MHz |

Follow us
Compare
Popular Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
AMD A9 7th Gen A9-9410 vs Intel Core i5 6200U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
AMD A9 7th Gen A9-9420 vs Intel Core i5 6200U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$168 | $300 | |
Intel Core i5 2500 vs Xeon W3520 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$296 | ||
AMD A12 7th Gen A12-9700P vs Intel Core i7 6700K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$296 | $272 | |
Intel Core i7 6700K vs 4790K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
Intel N4200 vs Core i3 6100U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
AMD A8 6410 vs Intel Core i5 4200U | ||