Winner
Intel Xeon E5-1620
CPUBoss recommends the Intel Xeon E5-1620 based on its single-core performance.
See full details Intel Xeon E5-2609 vs E5-1620 |
Released March, 2012
Intel Xeon E5-2609
- 2.4 GHz
- Quad core
- Unlocked
5.2 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Intel Xeon E5-2609
 | Much lower typical power consumption 65W | | Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 2 |
| | Much lower annual commercial energy cost 70.08 $/year | | Much lower annual home energy cost 19.27 $/year |
VS
Released March, 2012
Intel Xeon E5-1620
- 3.6 GHz
- Quad core
5.6 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the E5-1620
| | Much higher clock speed 3.6 GHz | | Much better PassMark (Single core) score 2,117 |
| | Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.93 GHz | | More threads 8 |
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of E5-2609 vs E5-1620 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 | |
| 5.6 | 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 lower typical power consumption | 65W | vs | 105.63W | Around 40% lower typical power consumption | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration | 2 | vs | 1 | Twice as many CPUs in SMP configuration | |||
| Much lower annual commercial energy cost | 70.08 $/year | vs | 113.88 $/year | Around 40% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
| Much lower annual home energy cost | 19.27 $/year | vs | 31.32 $/year | Around 40% lower annual home energy cost | |||
| |||||||
| Much higher clock speed | 3.6 GHz | vs | 2.4 GHz | More than 50% higher clock speed | |||
| Much better PassMark (Single core) score | 2,117 | vs | 980 | Around 2.2x better PassMark (Single core) score | |||
| Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.93 GHz | vs | 2.4 GHz | Around 65% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
| More threads | 8 | vs | 4 | Twice as many threads | |||
| Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.7 GHz | vs | 2.56 GHz | Around 85% better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E5-2609 vs E5-1620
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 E5-2609 | vs | E5-1620 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 3.6 GHz | |
| Cores | Quad core | Quad core | |
| Socket type | |||
| LGA 2011 | |||
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Supports trusted computing | Yes | Yes | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| MMX | |||
| 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 | 31.32 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 70.08 $/year | 113.88 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 8.89 pt/W | 7.47 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 65W | 105.63W | |
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 | Yes | |
| Maximum bandwidth | 34,133.32 MB/s | 51,200 MB/s | |
| Maximum memory size | 393,216 MB | 384,000 MB | |
details | Xeon E5-2609 | vs | E5-1620 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 38 | |
| Voltage range | 0.6 - 1.35V | 0.6 - 1.35V | |
| Operating temperature | Unknown - 70°C | Unknown - 64°C | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclocked clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 3.93 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 2.56 GHz | 4.7 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 2.4 GHz | 3.93 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 | QPI | |
| Number of links | 2 | 0 | |
| Transfer rate | 6,400 MT/s | 0 MT/s | |
| Clock speed | 3,200 MHz | 0 MHz | |
 Intel Xeon E5-2609  Report a correction |  Intel Xeon E5-1620 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $294 | $240 | |
| Intel Xeon E5-1620 vs Core i7 3770 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $294 | $350 | |
| Intel Xeon E5-1620 vs Core i7 6700K | ||
| | VS |  |
| $294 | $280 | |
| Intel Xeon E5-1620 vs Core i7 4770 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $294 | $583 | |
| Intel Xeon E5-1620 vs E5-1650 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $294 | $294 | |
| Intel Xeon E5-1620 vs E5 1620 v2 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $294 | $184 | |
| Intel Xeon E5-1620 vs Core i5 3570K | ||
| | VS |  |
| $294 | $410 | |
| Intel Xeon E5-1620 vs E5-2620 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $305 | $300 | |
| Intel Xeon W3520 vs Core i5 2500 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| Intel Core i5 4200U vs AMD A8 6410 | ||
 | VS | |
| $272 | $350 | |
| Intel Core i7 4790K vs 6700K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $180 | ||
| Intel Core i5 3470 vs AMD A6 5200 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| Intel Core i5 6200U vs AMD A9 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $134 | $225 | |
| Intel Celeron 847 vs Core i3 3217U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $275 | $161 | |
| Intel Core i3 4005U vs Pentium N3540 | ||
