CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of E5-2658 v3 vs D-1567 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

5.7

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Xeon E5-2658 v3 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Xeon E5-2658 v3  based on its single-core performance.

See full details

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 E5-2658 v3

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon E5-2658 v3

Report a correction
Slightly higher turbo clock speed 2.9 GHz vs 2.7 GHz More than 5% higher turbo clock speed
Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 2 vs 1 Twice as many CPUs in SMP configuration
Supports more RAM 786,432 MB vs 131,072 MB Supports 6x more RAM
Better PassMark score 16,351 vs 15,028 Around 10% better PassMark score
Slightly better PassMark (Single core) score 1,694 vs 1,564 Around 10% better PassMark (Single core) score
Slightly better overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.29 GHz vs 2.1 GHz Around 10% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Front view of Intel D-1567

Reasons to consider the
Intel D-1567

Report a correction
Significantly newer manufacturing process 14 nm vs 22 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much lower typical power consumption 52.81W vs 85.31W Around 40% lower typical power consumption
Significantly better performance per watt 6.07 pt/W vs 2.94 pt/W More than 2x better performance per watt
Better performance per dollar 0.3 pt/$ vs 0.17 pt/$ More than 80% better performance per dollar
Newer Jan, 2016 vs Jul, 2014 Release date over 1 years later
Much lower annual home energy cost 15.66 $/year vs 25.29 $/year Around 40% lower annual home energy cost
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 56.94 $/year vs 91.98 $/year Around 40% lower annual commercial energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E5-2658 v3 vs D-1567

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

D-1567
15,028

PassMark (Single Core)

D-1567
1,564

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon E5-2658 v3  vs
D-1567 
Clock speed 2.2 GHz 2.1 GHz
Turbo clock speed 2.9 GHz 2.7 GHz
Cores Duodeca core Duodeca core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
AES
AVX
AVX 2.0
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 105W 65W
Annual home energy cost 25.29 $/year 15.66 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 91.98 $/year 56.94 $/year
Performance per watt 2.94 pt/W 6.07 pt/W
Typical power consumption 85.31W 52.81W

bus

Architecture QPI FSB
Number of links 2 1

details

Xeon E5-2658 v3  vs
D-1567 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 24 24
Manufacture process 22 nm 14 nm
Max CPUs 2 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.29 GHz 2.1 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.2 GHz 2.1 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.29 GHz 2.1 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
DDR
Channels Quad Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC Yes Yes
Maximum bandwidth 6,400 MB/s 12,800 MB/s
Maximum memory size 786,432 MB 131,072 MB
Intel Xeon E5-2658 v3
Report a correction
Intel D-1567
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus