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 E5-2650L

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon E5-2650L

Report a correction
Significantly 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
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
Much lower typical power consumption 56.88W vs 112.55W Around 50% lower typical power consumption
More threads 16 vs 4 12 more threads
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
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
Supports more RAM 393,216 MB vs 32,768 MB Supports 12x more RAM
Much lower annual home energy cost 16.86 $/year vs 41.29 $/year 2.4x lower annual home energy cost
Better PassMark score 8,676 vs 6,383 More than 35% better PassMark score
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 61.32 $/year vs 110.03 $/year Around 45% lower annual commercial energy cost
Newer Mar, 2012 vs Jan, 2011 Release date over 1 years later
Front view of Intel Core i5 2500K

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i5 2500K

Report a correction
Much higher clock speed 3.3 GHz vs 1.8 GHz Around 85% higher clock speed
Much higher turbo clock speed 3.7 GHz vs 2.3 GHz More than 60% higher turbo clock speed
Much better performance per dollar 4.1 pt/$ vs 0.45 pt/$ Around 9.2x better performance per dollar
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Significantly better PassMark (Single core) score 1,863 vs 1,117 More than 65% better PassMark (Single core) score

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E5-2650L vs Core i5 2500K

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 E5-2650L
1,030,000 MB/s
Core i5 2500K
2,530,000 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon E5-2650L  vs
Core i5 2500K 
Clock speed 1.8 GHz 3.3 GHz
Turbo clock speed 2.3 GHz 3.7 GHz
Cores Octa core Quad core
Socket type
LGA 2011
LGA 1155

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing Yes No
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE4
AVX
SSE3
EM64T
SSE
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
Supplemental SSE3
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 70W 95W
Annual home energy cost 16.86 $/year 41.29 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 61.32 $/year 110.03 $/year
Performance per watt 7.09 pt/W 6.79 pt/W
Typical power consumption 56.88W 112.55W

bus

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

details

Xeon E5-2650L  vs
Core i5 2500K 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 16 4
L2 cache 2 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 0.25 MB/core
L3 cache 20 MB 6 MB
L3 cache per core 2.5 MB/core 1.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 2 1
Clock multiplier 23 33
Voltage range 0.6 - 1.35V 1.2 - 1.5V
Operating temperature Unknown - 72°C 5 - 72.6°C

integrated graphics

GPU None GPU
Label N/A Intel® HD Graphics 3000
Latest DirectX N/A 10.1
Number of displays supported N/A 2
GPU clock speed N/A 850 MHz
Turbo clock speed N/A 1,100 MHz
3DMark06 N/A 5,275

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1600
DDR3-1333
DDR3-1066
DDR3
DDR3-800
Channels Quad Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC Yes No
Maximum bandwidth 51,200 MB/s 21,333.32 MB/s
Maximum memory size 393,216 MB 32,768 MB
Intel Xeon E5-2650L
Report a correction
Intel Core i5 2500K
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus