CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of E5-2609 vs 3820 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

5.7

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Core i7 3820 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core i7 3820  based on its performance and single-core performance.

See full details

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 E5-2609

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon E5-2609

Report a correction
Much lower typical power consumption 65W vs 139.6W 2.1x lower typical power consumption
Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 2 vs 1 Twice as many CPUs in SMP configuration
Supports trusted computing Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing
Much lower annual home energy cost 19.27 $/year vs 49.49 $/year 2.6x lower annual home energy cost
Supports more RAM 393,216 MB vs 65,771.52 MB Supports around 6x more RAM
Better performance per watt 8.89 pt/W vs 6.18 pt/W Around 45% better performance per watt
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 70.08 $/year vs 138.93 $/year Around 50% lower annual commercial energy cost
Slightly higher Maximum operating temperature 70 °C vs 66.8 °C Around 5% higher Maximum operating temperature
Front view of Intel Core i7 3820

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i7 3820

Report a correction
Significantly higher clock speed 3.6 GHz vs 2.4 GHz More than 50% higher clock speed
Much better performance per dollar 4.08 pt/$ vs 2.33 pt/$ More than 75% better performance per dollar
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.68 GHz vs 2.4 GHz More than 95% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Significantly better PassMark (Single core) score 1,943 vs 980 Around 2x better PassMark (Single core) score
More threads 8 vs 4 Twice as many threads
Better PassMark score 8,998 vs 6,973 Around 30% better PassMark score
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.71 GHz vs 2.56 GHz Around 85% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E5-2609 vs Core i7 3820

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E5-2609
9,537
Core i7 3820
12,538

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E5-2609
1,620,000 MB/s
Core i7 3820
2,500,000 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E5-2609
6,642
Core i7 3820
12,550

GeekBench

Xeon E5-2609
6,642
Core i7 3820
15,655

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon E5-2609  vs
Core i7 3820 
Clock speed 2.4 GHz 3.6 GHz
Cores Quad core Quad core
Socket type
LGA 2011
Is unlocked Yes Yes

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing Yes No
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE4
AVX
SSE3
SSE
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
Supplemental SSE3
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 80W 130W
Annual home energy cost 19.27 $/year 49.49 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 70.08 $/year 138.93 $/year
Performance per watt 8.89 pt/W 6.18 pt/W
Typical power consumption 65W 139.6W

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1600
DDR3-1333
DDR3-1066
DDR3
DDR3-800
Channels Quad Channel Quad Channel
Supports ECC Yes No
Maximum bandwidth 34,133.32 MB/s 51,200 MB/s
Maximum memory size 393,216 MB 65,771.52 MB

details

Xeon E5-2609  vs
Core i7 3820 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 8
L2 cache 1 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 0.25 MB/core
L3 cache 10 MB 10 MB
L3 cache per core 2.5 MB/core 2.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 2 1
Clock multiplier 24 36
Voltage range 0.6 - 1.35V 0.6 - 1.35V
Operating temperature Unknown - 70°C Unknown - 66.8°C

overclocking

Overclock popularity 1 142
Overclocked clock speed 2.4 GHz 4.68 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.56 GHz 4.71 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.4 GHz 4.68 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 DMI 2.0
Number of links 2 1
Transfer rate 6,400 MT/s 5,000 MT/s
Intel Xeon E5-2609
Report a correction
Intel Core i7 3820
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus