CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of E5-2660 vs E5-2418L 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 E5-2660

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon E5-2660

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 higher turbo clock speed 3 GHz vs 2.1 GHz Around 45% higher turbo clock speed
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
Much better PassMark score 13,435 vs 5,202 More than 2.5x better PassMark score
Much better PassMark (Single core) score 1,445 vs 1,090 Around 35% better PassMark (Single core) score
Significantly higher clock speed 2.2 GHz vs 2 GHz More than 10% higher clock speed
More cores 8 vs 4 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Much better performance per watt 7.69 pt/W vs 3.35 pt/W More than 2.2x better performance per watt
More threads 16 vs 8 Twice as many threads
Front view of Intel Xeon E5-2418L

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon E5-2418L

Report a correction
Much higher Maximum operating temperature 91 °C vs 73 °C Around 25% higher Maximum operating temperature
Much lower typical power consumption 40.63W vs 77.19W More than 45% lower typical power consumption
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 43.8 $/year vs 83.22 $/year More than 45% lower annual commercial energy cost
Much lower annual home energy cost 12.04 $/year vs 22.89 $/year More than 45% lower annual home energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E5-2660 vs E5-2418L

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon E5-2660  vs
E5-2418L 
Clock speed 2.2 GHz 2 GHz
Turbo clock speed 3 GHz 2.1 GHz
Cores Octa core Quad core

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

power consumption

TDP 95W 50W
Annual home energy cost 22.89 $/year 12.04 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 83.22 $/year 43.8 $/year
Performance per watt 7.69 pt/W 3.35 pt/W
Typical power consumption 77.19W 40.63W

bus

Architecture QPI QPI
Number of links 2 1
Data rate 64,000 MB/s 25,600 MB/s
Transfer rate 8,000 MT/s 6,400 MT/s
Clock speed 4,000 MHz 3,200 MHz

details

Xeon E5-2660  vs
E5-2418L 
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 2
Operating temperature Unknown - 73°C Unknown - 91°C

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
DDR3-1600
DDR3-1333
DDR3-1066
DDR3
DDR3-800
Channels Quad Channel Triple Channel
Supports ECC Yes Yes
Maximum bandwidth 51,200 MB/s 31,999.98 MB/s
Maximum memory size 393,216 MB 393,216 MB
Intel Xeon E5-2660
Report a correction
Intel Xeon E5-2418L
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus