CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of E5-2680 vs 4386 among all CPUs

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores
Xeon E5-2680
7.3
Opteron 4386
5.0
Xeon E5-2670
6.6
PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance
Xeon E5-2680
8.8
Opteron 4386
6.8
Xeon E5-2670
8.4
PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more

Integrated Graphics

Integrated GPU performance for graphics
Xeon E5-2680
n.d.
Opteron 4386
n.d.
Xeon E5-2670
n.d.
Sky Diver and Cloud Gate

Integrated Graphics (OpenCL)

Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing
Xeon E5-2680
0.0
Opteron 4386
0.0
Xeon E5-2670
0.0
CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more

Performance per Watt

How efficiently does the processor use electricity?
Xeon E5-2680
5.0
Opteron 4386
5.0
Xeon E5-2670
5.0
Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?
Xeon E5-2680
n.d.
Opteron 4386
n.d.
Xeon E5-2670
n.d.
Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more
5.8

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets
Xeon E5-2680
5.8
Opteron 4386
4.8
Xeon E5-2670
5.5

Winner
AMD Opteron 4386 

CPUBoss recommends the AMD Opteron 4386  based on its cost to run.

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

Intel Xeon E5-2680

Front view of Intel Xeon E5-2680
Front view of AMD Opteron 4386

AMD Opteron 4386

Join the discussion

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Xeon E5-2680

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon E5-2680

Report a correction
Much more l3 cache 20 MB vs 8 MB 2.5x more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later
Much better performance per watt 7.63 pt/W vs 0.67 pt/W More than 11.2x better performance per watt
Much higher Maximum operating temperature 85 °C vs 70.5 °C More than 20% higher Maximum operating temperature
More threads 16 vs 8 Twice as many threads
Much more l3 cache per core 2.5 MB/core vs 1 MB/core 2.5x more l3 cache per core
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.5 GHz vs 3.1 GHz Around 15% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of AMD Opteron 4386

Reasons to consider the
AMD Opteron 4386

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 8 MB vs 2 MB 4x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much higher clock speed 3.1 GHz vs 2.7 GHz Around 15% higher clock speed
Higher turbo clock speed 3.8 GHz vs 3.5 GHz Around 10% higher turbo clock speed
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 4x more l2 cache per core
Significantly lower typical power consumption 77.19W vs 105.63W More than 25% lower typical power consumption
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.41 GHz vs 3.14 GHz Around 10% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
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
Newer Dec, 2012 vs Mar, 2012 Release date 9 months later

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E5-2680 vs Opteron 4386

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E5-2680
9,438
Opteron 4386
1,846

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E5-2680
2,569
Opteron 4386
1,851

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E5-2680
2,060,000 MB/s
Opteron 4386
2,200 MB/s

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

 Xeon E5-2680  vs
Opteron 4386 
Clock speed 2.7 GHz 3.1 GHz
Turbo clock speed 3.5 GHz 3.8 GHz
Cores Octa core Octa core
Socket type
LGA 2011
C32

features
Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
AVX 1.1
SSE2
F16C
MMX
XOP
AVX
SSE3
SSE
CLMUL
AMD64
SSE4.1
FMA4
FMA3
SSE4.2
CVT16
AMD-V
Supplemental SSE3
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption
TDP 130W 95W
Annual home energy cost 31.32 $/year 22.89 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 113.88 $/year 83.22 $/year
Performance per watt 7.63 pt/W 0.67 pt/W
Typical power consumption 105.63W 77.19W

bus
Architecture QPI HyperTransport 3.0
Transfer rate 8,000 MT/s 6,400 MT/s
Clock speed 4,000 MHz 3,200 MHz

details

 Xeon E5-2680  vs
Opteron 4386 
Threads 16 8
L2 cache 2 MB 8 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 1 MB/core
L3 cache 20 MB 8 MB
L3 cache per core 2.5 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 2 2
Clock multiplier 35 19
Operating temperature Unknown - 85°C Unknown - 70.5°C

overclocking
Overclocked clock speed 3.14 GHz 3.41 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.5 GHz 3.1 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.14 GHz 3.41 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
DDR3-1600
DDR3-1333
DDR3-1066
DDR3
DDR3-800
Channels Quad Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC Yes Yes
Maximum bandwidth 51,200 MB/s 12,800 MB/s
Intel Xeon E5-2680
Report a correction
AMD Opteron 4386
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus

features

information

  • terms and privacy
  • about
  • blog

on the web

CPUBoss