CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of E5-2648L 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

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 E5-2648L

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon E5-2648L

Report a correction
Much more l3 cache 20 MB vs 10 MB 2x more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later
Much more l2 cache 2 MB vs 1 MB 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
More cores 8 vs 4 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
More threads 16 vs 8 Twice as many threads
Much lower typical power consumption 56.88W vs 105.63W More than 45% 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 61.32 $/year vs 113.88 $/year More than 45% lower annual commercial energy cost
Much lower annual home energy cost 16.86 $/year vs 31.32 $/year More than 45% lower annual home energy cost
Front view of Intel Xeon E5-1620

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon E5-1620

Report a correction
Much higher clock speed 3.6 GHz vs 1.8 GHz 2x higher clock speed
Much higher turbo clock speed 3.8 GHz vs 2.1 GHz More than 80% higher turbo clock speed
Much better PassMark (Single core) score 2,117 vs 1,179 Around 80% better PassMark (Single core) score
Much better performance per dollar 3.3 pt/$ vs 0.27 pt/$ More than 12.2x better performance per dollar

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E5-2648L vs E5-1620

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon E5-2648L  vs
E5-1620 
Clock speed 1.8 GHz 3.6 GHz
Turbo clock speed 2.1 GHz 3.8 GHz
Cores Octa 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

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 51,200 MB/s 51,200 MB/s
Maximum memory size 393,216 MB 384,000 MB

details

Xeon E5-2648L  vs
E5-1620 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 16 8
L2 cache 2 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 0.25 MB/core
L3 cache 20 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

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

power consumption

TDP 70W 130W
Annual home energy cost 16.86 $/year 31.32 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 61.32 $/year 113.88 $/year
Performance per watt 5.04 pt/W 7.47 pt/W
Typical power consumption 56.88W 105.63W

bus

Architecture QPI QPI
Number of links 2 0
Transfer rate 8,000 MT/s 0 MT/s
Clock speed 4,000 MHz 0 MHz
Intel Xeon E5-2648L
Report a correction
Intel Xeon E5-1620
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus