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 E5-2680

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon E5-2680

Report a correction
Much better PassMark (Single core) score 1,774 vs 1,311 More than 35% better PassMark (Single core) score
Much more l3 cache 20 MB vs 16 MB 25% 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 2.08 pt/W Around 3.8x better performance per watt
Much higher Maximum operating temperature 85 °C vs 71.7 °C Around 20% higher Maximum operating temperature
More threads 16 vs 8 Twice as many threads
More l3 cache per core 2.5 MB/core vs 2 MB/core 25% more l3 cache per core
Front view of AMD Opteron 6328

Reasons to consider the
AMD Opteron 6328

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 3.2 GHz vs 2.7 GHz Around 20% 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
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.8 GHz vs 3.14 GHz More than 20% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Lower typical power consumption 93.44W vs 105.63W More than 10% lower typical power consumption
Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 4 vs 2 Twice as many CPUs in SMP configuration
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.8 GHz vs 3.5 GHz Around 10% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Lower annual commercial energy cost 100.74 $/year vs 113.88 $/year More than 10% lower annual commercial energy cost
Lower annual home energy cost 27.7 $/year vs 31.32 $/year More than 10% lower annual home energy cost
Newer Nov, 2012 vs Mar, 2012 Release date 8 months later

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E5-2680 vs Opteron 6328

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E5-2680
9,438
Opteron 6328
19,224

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E5-2680
2,060,000 MB/s
Opteron 6328
2,280 MB/s

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Xeon E5-2680
19,922
Opteron 6328
7,813

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon E5-2680  vs
Opteron 6328 
Clock speed 2.7 GHz 3.2 GHz
Turbo clock speed 3.5 GHz 3.8 GHz
Cores Octa core Octa core
Socket type
LGA 2011
G34

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
ABM
BMI1
CLMUL
AMD64
SSE4.1
FMA4
FMA3
SSE4.2
CVT16
AMD-V
Supplemental SSE3
AES
TBM
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 130W 115W
Annual home energy cost 31.32 $/year 27.7 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 113.88 $/year 100.74 $/year
Performance per watt 7.63 pt/W 2.08 pt/W
Typical power consumption 105.63W 93.44W

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 6328 
Threads 16 8
L2 cache 2 MB 8 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 1 MB/core
L3 cache 20 MB 16 MB
L3 cache per core 2.5 MB/core 2 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 2 4
Clock multiplier 35 19
Operating temperature Unknown - 85°C Unknown - 71.7°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 3.14 GHz 3.8 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.5 GHz 3.8 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.14 GHz 3.8 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 Quad Channel
Supports ECC Yes Yes
Maximum bandwidth 51,200 MB/s 25,600 MB/s
Intel Xeon E5-2680
Report a correction
AMD Opteron 6328
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus