Intel Xeon E5 2650 v2 vs 1620 v2 |
Expected September, 2013
Intel Xeon E5 2650 v2
- 2.6 GHz
- Octa core
Reasons to buy the Intel Xeon E5 2650 v2
 | Much more l3 cache 20 MB | | Much more l2 cache 2 MB |
| | Supports more RAM 786,432 MB | | Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes |
VS
Released July, 2013
Intel Xeon E5 1620 v2
- 3.7 GHz
- Quad core
Reasons to buy the 1620 v2
| | Much higher clock speed 3.7 GHz | | Significantly higher turbo clock speed 3.9 GHz |
| | Much better performance per dollar 5.78 pt/$ | | Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.21 GHz |
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 | |||
| Supports more RAM | 786,432 MB | vs | 262,144 MB | Supports 3x more RAM | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; Allows for maximum performance when needed, while conserving power and minimizing heat production when not needed | |||
| More cores | 8 | vs | 4 | Twice as many cores; run more applications at once | |||
| More threads | 16 | vs | 8 | Twice as many threads | |||
| Significantly lower typical power consumption | 77.19W | vs | 105.63W | More than 25% lower typical power consumption | |||
| Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration | 2 | vs | 1 | Twice as many CPUs in SMP configuration | |||
| Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost | 83.22 $/year | vs | 113.88 $/year | More than 25% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
| Significantly lower annual home energy cost | 22.89 $/year | vs | 31.32 $/year | More than 25% lower annual home energy cost | |||
| |||||||
| Much higher clock speed | 3.7 GHz | vs | 2.6 GHz | More than 40% higher clock speed | |||
| Significantly higher turbo clock speed | 3.9 GHz | vs | 3.4 GHz | Around 15% higher turbo clock speed | |||
| Much better performance per dollar | 5.78 pt/$ | vs | 0.73 pt/$ | Around 8x better performance per dollar | |||
| Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.21 GHz | vs | 2.93 GHz | Around 45% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
| Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.03 GHz | vs | 3.41 GHz | Around 20% better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E5 2650 v2 vs 1620 v2
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
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Xeon E5 2650 v2 | vs | 1620 v2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 2.6 GHz | 3.7 GHz | |
| Turbo clock speed | 3.4 GHz | 3.9 GHz | |
| Cores | Octa core | Quad core | |
| Socket type | |||
| LGA 2011 | |||
| Is unlocked | No | No | |
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Supports trusted computing | Yes | Yes | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| F16C | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE4 | |||
| AVX | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE | |||
| SSE4.1 | |||
| SSE4.2 | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| AES | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | No | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 95W | 130W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 22.89 $/year | 31.32 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 83.22 $/year | 113.88 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 8.85 pt/W | 13.06 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 77.19W | 105.63W | |
bus | |||
| Number of links | 2 | 0 | |
details | Xeon E5 2650 v2 | vs | 1620 v2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 22 nm | 22 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 2 | 1 | |
| Clock multiplier | 26 | 37 | |
| Operating temperature | Unknown - 75°C | Unknown - 70°C | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclocked clock speed | 2.93 GHz | 4.21 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 3.41 GHz | 4.03 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 2.93 GHz | 4.21 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 | |
memory controller | |||
| Memory controller | Built-in | Built-in | |
| Memory type | |||
| DDR3-1866 | |||
| DDR3-1600 | |||
| DDR3-1333 | |||
| DDR3-1066 | |||
| DDR3-800 | |||
| Channels | Quad Channel | Quad Channel | |
| Supports ECC | Yes | Yes | |
| Maximum bandwidth | 59,733.32 MB/s | 59,733.32 MB/s | |
| Maximum memory size | 786,432 MB | 262,144 MB | |
 Intel Xeon E5 2650 v2  Report a correction |  Intel Xeon E5 1620 v2 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $1,155 | ||
| 2650 v2 vs E5-2689 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $1,155 | $1,126 | |
| 2650 v2 vs E5-2650 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $1,155 | $1,594 | |
| 2650 v2 vs E5-2670 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $1,155 | $583 | |
| 2650 v2 vs 1650 v2 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $1,155 | $262 | |
| 2650 v2 vs E5-2620 v3 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $294 | $248 | |
| 1620 v2 vs 4770K | ||
| | VS |  |
| $294 | $294 | |
| 1620 v2 vs E5-1620 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $305 | $300 | |
| W3520 vs 2500 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $272 | $350 | |
| 4790K vs 6700K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 4200U vs 6410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 6200U vs 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $275 | $161 | |
| 4005U vs N3540 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $248 | $230 | |
| 4770K vs 9590 | ||
 | VS | |
| $250 | $350 | |
| 6600K vs 6700K | ||
