0 Comments
| Intel Xeon E5-2689 vs E5-2420 v2 |
Released March, 2012
Intel Xeon E5-2689
- 2.6 GHz
- Octa core
Reasons to buy the Intel Xeon E5-2689
![]() | Much higher clock speed 2.6 GHz | ![]() | Much more l3 cache 20 MB |
![]() | Much better PassMark (Single core) score 2,091 | ![]() | Much better performance per watt 10.97 pt/W |
VS
Released January, 2014
Intel Xeon E5-2420 v2
- 2.2 GHz
- Hexa core
Reasons to buy the E5-2420 v2
![]() | Significantly lower typical power consumption 65W | ![]() | Newer manufacturing process 22 nm |
![]() | Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost 70.08 $/year | ![]() | Significantly lower annual home energy cost 19.27 $/year |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
Much higher clock speed | 2.6 GHz | vs | 2.2 GHz | Around 20% higher clock speed | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Much more l3 cache | 20 MB | vs | 15 MB | Around 35% more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later | |||
Much better PassMark (Single core) score | 2,091 | vs | 1,355 | Around 55% better PassMark (Single core) score | |||
Much better performance per watt | 10.97 pt/W | vs | 2.67 pt/W | More than 4x better performance per watt | |||
More l2 cache | 2 MB | vs | 1.5 MB | Around 35% more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later | |||
More threads | 16 | vs | 12 | 4 more threads | |||
| |||||||
Significantly lower typical power consumption | 65W | vs | 93.44W | More than 30% lower typical power consumption | |||
Newer manufacturing process | 22 nm | vs | 32 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost | 70.08 $/year | vs | 100.74 $/year | More than 30% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
Significantly lower annual home energy cost | 19.27 $/year | vs | 27.7 $/year | More than 30% lower annual home energy cost | |||
Newer | Jan, 2014 | vs | Mar, 2012 | Release date over 1 years later |
Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E5-2689 vs E5-2420 v2
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Xeon E5-2689
36,294
Xeon E5-2420 v2
13,425
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Xeon E5-2689
2,912
Xeon E5-2420 v2
2,240
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Xeon E5-2689
2,360,000 MB/s
Xeon E5-2420 v2
1,590 MB/s
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
Xeon E5-2689
19,521
Xeon E5-2420 v2
8,570
PassMark (Single Core)
Xeon E5-2689
2,091
Xeon E5-2420 v2
1,355
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Xeon E5-2689 | vs | E5-2420 v2 |
---|---|---|---|
Clock speed | 2.6 GHz | 2.2 GHz | |
Cores | Octa core | Hexa core | |
Socket type | |||
LGA 2011 | |||
LGA 1356 | |||
features | |||
Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
Supports trusted computing | Yes | Yes | |
Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
Instruction set extensions | |||
SSE2 | |||
F16C | |||
MMX | |||
SSE4 | |||
AVX | |||
SSE3 | |||
EM64T | |||
SSE | |||
SSE4.1 | |||
SSE4.2 | |||
Supplemental SSE3 | |||
AES | |||
Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes |
details | Xeon E5-2689 | vs | E5-2420 v2 |
---|---|---|---|
Threads | 16 | 12 | |
L2 cache | 2 MB | 1.5 MB | |
L2 cache per core | 0.25 MB/core | 0.25 MB/core | |
L3 cache | 20 MB | 15 MB | |
L3 cache per core | 2.5 MB/core | 2.5 MB/core | |
Manufacture process | 32 nm | 22 nm | |
Max CPUs | 2 | 2 | |
power consumption | |||
TDP | 115W | 80W | |
Annual home energy cost | 27.7 $/year | 19.27 $/year | |
Annual commercial energy cost | 100.74 $/year | 70.08 $/year | |
Performance per watt | 10.97 pt/W | 2.67 pt/W | |
Typical power consumption | 93.44W | 65W | |
bus | |||
Architecture | QPI | QPI | |
Number of links | 2 | 1 | |
Data rate | 64,000 MB/s | 28,800 MB/s | |
Transfer rate | 8,000 MT/s | 5,000 MT/s | |
Clock speed | 4,000 MHz | 3,600 MHz |
Intel Xeon E5-2689 ![]() | Intel Xeon E5-2420 v2 ![]() |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$1,155 | ||
E5-2689 vs 2650 v2 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$2,086 | ||
E5-2689 vs E5-2690 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$350 | ||
E5-2689 vs 6700K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$262 | ||
E5-2689 vs E5-2620 v3 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$1,650 | ||
E5-2689 vs E5-2670 v3 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$1,594 | ||
E5-2689 vs E5-2670 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$406 | $414 | |
E5-2420 v2 vs E5-2420 | ||
Popular Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$305 | $300 | |
W3520 vs 2500 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$272 | $350 | |
4790K vs 6700K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
4200U vs 6410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
6200U vs 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$275 | $161 | |
4005U vs N3540 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$250 | $350 | |
6600K vs 6700K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$248 | $230 | |
4770K vs 9590 | ||