CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 2603 v2 vs 2435 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

No winner declared

Too close to call

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Xeon E5 2603 v2

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon E5 2603 v2

Report a correction
Much more l3 cache 10 MB vs 6 MB More than 65% more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later
Newer manufacturing process 22 nm vs 45 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much more l3 cache per core 2.5 MB/core vs 1 MB/core 2.5x more l3 cache per core
Newer Jul, 2013 vs Jun, 2009 Release date over 4 years later
Front view of AMD Opteron 2435

Reasons to consider the
AMD Opteron 2435

Report a correction
Much higher clock speed 2.6 GHz vs 1.8 GHz Around 45% higher clock speed
Much more l2 cache 3 MB vs 1 MB 3x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
More cores 6 vs 4 2 more cores; run more applications at once
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.61 GHz vs 1.83 GHz Around 45% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
More threads 6 vs 4 2 more threads
Much more l2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.6 GHz vs 1.8 GHz Around 45% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E5 2603 v2 vs Opteron 2435

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon E5 2603 v2  vs
Opteron 2435 
Clock speed 1.8 GHz 2.6 GHz
Cores Quad core Hexa core
Socket type
LGA 2011
F
Is unlocked No No

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
SSE2
MMX
SSE4
AVX
SSE3
SSE
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
3DNow!
Supplemental SSE3
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 80W 75W
Annual home energy cost 19.27 $/year 18.07 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 70.08 $/year 65.7 $/year
Performance per watt 1.65 pt/W 2.04 pt/W
Typical power consumption 65W 60.94W

details

Xeon E5 2603 v2  vs
Opteron 2435 
Threads 4 6
L2 cache 1 MB 3 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
L3 cache 10 MB 6 MB
L3 cache per core 2.5 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nm 45 nm
Max CPUs 2 2
Clock multiplier 18 13
Operating temperature Unknown - 71°C 0 - 55°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 1.83 GHz 2.61 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.8 GHz 2.6 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 1.83 GHz 2.61 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU None None
Label N/A N/A
Latest DirectX N/A N/A
Number of displays supported N/A N/A
GPU clock speed N/A N/A
Turbo clock speed N/A N/A
3DMark06 N/A N/A

bus

Architecture QPI HyperTransport 3.0
Clock speed 3,200 MHz 2,200 MHz
Intel Xeon E5 2603 v2
Report a correction
AMD Opteron 2435
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus