Winner
Intel Xeon E3-1270 v3
CPUBoss recommends the Intel Xeon E3-1270 v3 based on its value.
See full details Intel Xeon E3-1270 v3 vs v2 |
Released April, 2013
Intel Xeon E3-1270 v3
- 3.5 GHz
- Quad core
5.5 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Intel Xeon E3-1270 v3
 | Much better performance per watt 22.5 pt/W | | Much better performance per dollar 5.29 pt/$ |
| | Newer Apr, 2013 |
by Ian-Cutress (Nov, 2014)High floating point performance, MHz and IPC wins in the single thread version, whereas the multithread version has to handle the threads and loves more cores.
VS
Released May, 2012
Intel Xeon E3-1270 v2
- 3.5 GHz
- Quad core
7.7 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the v2
| | Has a built-in GPU Yes | | Lower typical power consumption 56.06W |
| | Lower annual commercial energy cost 60.44 $/year | | Lower annual home energy cost 16.62 $/year |
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of E3-1270 v3 vs E3-1270 v2 among all CPUs
Performance | |
Benchmark performance using all cores | |
| PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more | |
Single-core Performance | |
Individual core benchmark performance | |
| PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more | |
Integrated Graphics | |
Integrated GPU performance for graphics | |
| Sky Diver and Cloud Gate | |
Integrated Graphics (OpenCL) | |
Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more | |
Performance per Watt | |
How efficiently does the processor use electricity? | |
| Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more | |
Value | |
Are you paying a premium for performance? | |
| Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more | |
| 7.7 | CPUBoss Score |
Combination of all six facets | |
 | Winner |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Much better performance per watt | 22.5 pt/W | vs | 3.52 pt/W | Around 6.5x better performance per watt | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Much better performance per dollar | 5.29 pt/$ | vs | 0.68 pt/$ | Around 7.8x better performance per dollar | |||
| Newer | Apr, 2013 | vs | May, 2012 | Release date 10 months later | |||
| |||||||
| Has a built-in GPU | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required | |||
| Lower typical power consumption | 56.06W | vs | 65W | Around 15% lower typical power consumption | |||
| Lower annual commercial energy cost | 60.44 $/year | vs | 70.08 $/year | Around 15% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
| Lower annual home energy cost | 16.62 $/year | vs | 19.27 $/year | Around 15% lower annual home energy cost | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E3-1270 v3 vs v2
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
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
PassMark (Single Core)
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Xeon E3-1270 v3 | vs | v2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 3.5 GHz | 3.5 GHz | |
| Turbo clock speed | 3.9 GHz | 3.9 GHz | |
| Cores | Quad core | Quad core | |
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Supports trusted computing | Yes | Yes | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE4 | |||
| AVX | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| EM64T | |||
| SSE | |||
| SSE4.1 | |||
| SSE4.2 | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| AES | |||
| AVX 2.0 | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
memory controller | |||
| Memory controller | Built-in | Built-in | |
| Memory type | |||
| DDR3-1600 | |||
| DDR3-1333 | |||
| DDR3 | |||
| Channels | Dual Channel | Dual Channel | |
| Supports ECC | Yes | Yes | |
| Maximum bandwidth | 25,600 MB/s | 25,600 MB/s | |
| Maximum memory size | 32,768 MB | 33,556.48 MB | |
details | Xeon E3-1270 v3 | vs | v2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 8 | 8 | |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 1 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 0.25 MB/core | 0.25 MB/core | |
| L3 cache | 8 MB | 8 MB | |
| L3 cache per core | 2 MB/core | 2 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 22 nm | 22 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
integrated graphics | |||
| GPU | None | GPU | |
| Number of displays supported | N/A | 0 | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 80W | 69W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 19.27 $/year | 16.62 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 70.08 $/year | 60.44 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 22.5 pt/W | 3.52 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 65W | 56.06W | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | DMI | DMI | |
| Number of links | 0 | 1 | |
| Transfer rate | 5,000 MT/s | 5,000 MT/s | |
 Intel Xeon E3-1270 v3  Report a correction |  Intel Xeon E3-1270 v2 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $240 | $355 | |
| 3770 vs E3-1270 v2 | ||
 | VS | |
| $264 | $355 | |
| 3770K vs E3-1270 v2 | ||
 | VS | |
| $336 | $355 | |
| E3-1270 vs E3-1270 v2 | ||
 | VS | |
| $225 | $355 | |
| E3-1230 v2 vs E3-1270 v2 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $248 | $340 | |
| 4770K vs E3-1270 v3 | ||
 | VS | |
| $280 | $340 | |
| 4770 vs E3-1270 v3 | ||
 | VS | |
| $272 | $340 | |
| 4790K vs E3-1270 v3 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 7th Gen A9-9410 vs 6200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $300 | $305 | |
| 2500 vs W3520 | ||
 | VS | |
| $281 | ||
| 7th Gen A9-9420 vs 6200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $350 | ||
| 7th Gen A12-9700P vs 6700K | ||
| | VS | |
| $350 | $272 | |
| 6700K vs 4790K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 6410 vs 4200U | ||
| | VS | |
| $350 | ||
| 7th Gen A9-9410 vs 6700K | ||
