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 E5-2618L v3

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon E5-2618L v3

Report a correction
Significantly more l3 cache 20 MB vs 6 MB More than 3.2x more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later
More cores 8 vs 4 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 2 vs 1 Twice as many CPUs in SMP configuration
More threads 16 vs 8 Twice as many threads
Significantly better PassMark score 12,508 vs 7,464 Around 70% better PassMark score
Supports trusted computing Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing
Significantly more l3 cache per core 2.5 MB/core vs 1.5 MB/core More than 65% more l3 cache per core
Better PassMark (Single core) score 1,960 vs 1,636 Around 20% better PassMark (Single core) score
Newer Jul, 2014 vs Apr, 2012 Release date over 2 years later
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.8 GHz vs 2.3 GHz More than 20% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of Intel Core i7 3610QM

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i7 3610QM

Report a correction
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Much better performance per dollar 1.23 pt/$ vs 0.3 pt/$ More than 4x better performance per dollar
Much better performance per watt 10.92 pt/W vs 3.13 pt/W Around 3.5x better performance per watt
Significantly lower typical power consumption 36.56W vs 60.94W 40% lower typical power consumption
Significantly higher Maximum operating temperature 105 °C vs 87.03 °C More than 20% higher Maximum operating temperature
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.11 GHz vs 2.8 GHz More than 10% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost 39.42 $/year vs 65.7 $/year 40% lower annual commercial energy cost
Significantly lower annual home energy cost 10.84 $/year vs 18.07 $/year 40% lower annual home energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E5-2618L v3 vs Core i7 3610QM

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

Xeon E5-2618L v3
2,970 MB/s
Core i7 3610QM
2,200,000 MB/s

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon E5-2618L v3  vs
Core i7 3610QM 
Clock speed 2.3 GHz 2.3 GHz
Turbo clock speed 3.4 GHz 3.3 GHz
Cores Octa core Quad core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing Yes No
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
AVX
SSE3
SSE
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
Supplemental SSE3
AES
AVX 2.0
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 75W 45W
Annual home energy cost 18.07 $/year 10.84 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 65.7 $/year 39.42 $/year
Performance per watt 3.13 pt/W 10.92 pt/W
Typical power consumption 60.94W 36.56W

bus

Architecture QPI DMI
Number of links 2 1
Transfer rate 8,000 MT/s 5,000 MT/s

details

Xeon E5-2618L v3  vs
Core i7 3610QM 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 16 8
L3 cache 20 MB 6 MB
L3 cache per core 2.5 MB/core 1.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nm 22 nm
Max CPUs 2 1
Operating temperature Unknown - 87.03°C Unknown - 105°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.8 GHz 3.11 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.8 GHz 2.3 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.8 GHz 3.11 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU None GPU
Label N/A Intel® HD Graphics 4000
Latest DirectX N/A 10.x
Number of displays supported N/A 3
GPU clock speed N/A 650 MHz
Turbo clock speed N/A 1,100 MHz
3DMark06 N/A 5,344.5

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1600
DDR3L-1600
DDR3-1333
DDR3L-1333
DDR
Channels Quad Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC Yes No
Maximum bandwidth 6,400 MB/s 25,600 MB/s
Intel Xeon E5-2618L v3
Report a correction
Intel Core i7 3610QM
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus