Intel Xeon E5-2648L vs E5-1620 |
Released March, 2012
Intel Xeon E5-2648L
- 1.8 GHz
- Octa core
5.6 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Intel Xeon E5-2648L
 | Much more l3 cache 20 MB | | Much more l2 cache 2 MB |
| | More cores 8 | | More threads 16 |
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 higher turbo clock speed 3.8 GHz |
| | Much better PassMark (Single core) score 2,117 | | Much better performance per dollar 3.3 pt/$ |
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?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| 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 $/year | More than 45% lower annual home energy cost | |||
| |||||||
| Much higher clock speed | 3.6 GHz | vs | 1.8 GHz | 2x higher clock speed | |||
| Much higher turbo clock speed | 3.8 GHz | vs | 2.1 GHz | More than 80% higher turbo clock speed | |||
| Much better PassMark (Single core) score | 2,117 | vs | 1,179 | Around 80% better PassMark (Single core) score | |||
| Much better performance per dollar | 3.3 pt/$ | vs | 0.27 pt/$ | More than 12.2x better performance per dollar | |||
Report a correction
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 |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $240 | $294 | |
| 3770 vs E5-1620 | ||
 | VS | |
| $280 | $294 | |
| 4770 vs E5-1620 | ||
 | VS | |
| $294 | $294 | |
| 1620 v2 vs E5-1620 | ||
 | VS | |
| $410 | $294 | |
| E5-2620 vs E5-1620 | ||
 | VS | |
| $583 | $294 | |
| E5-1650 vs E5-1620 | ||
 | VS | |
| $350 | $294 | |
| 6700K vs E5-1620 | ||
 | VS | |
| $160 | $294 | |
| 4570 vs E5-1620 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $300 | $305 | |
| 2500 vs W3520 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $350 | $272 | |
| 6700K vs 4790K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 6410 vs 4200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 7th Gen A9-9410 vs 6200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $161 | $275 | |
| N3540 vs 4005U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $225 | $134 | |
| 3217U vs 847 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $180 | ||
| 5200 vs 3470 | ||
