0 Comments
| Intel Xeon E5-2689 vs E5 2650 v2 |
VS
Expected September, 2013
Intel Xeon E5 2650 v2
- 2.6 GHz
- Octa core
Reasons to buy the E5 2650 v2
![]() | Lower typical power consumption 77.19W | ![]() | Newer manufacturing process 22 nm |
![]() | Lower annual commercial energy cost 83.22 $/year | ![]() | Lower annual home energy cost 22.89 $/year |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the Xeon E5-2689 vs the Xeon E5 2650 v2. | |||||||
| |||||||
Lower typical power consumption | 77.19W | vs | 93.44W | More than 15% 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 | |||
Lower annual commercial energy cost | 83.22 $/year | vs | 100.74 $/year | More than 15% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
Lower annual home energy cost | 22.89 $/year | vs | 27.7 $/year | More than 15% lower annual home energy cost |
Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E5-2689 vs E5 2650 v2
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Xeon E5-2689
36,294
Xeon E5 2650 v2
9,380
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Xeon E5-2689
2,912
Xeon E5 2650 v2
2,285
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Xeon E5-2689
2,360,000 MB/s
Xeon E5 2650 v2
1,800,000 MB/s
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
Xeon E5-2689
19,521
Xeon E5 2650 v2
13,053
PassMark (Single Core)
Xeon E5-2689
2,091
Xeon E5 2650 v2
1,652
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Xeon E5-2689 | vs | E5 2650 v2 |
---|---|---|---|
Clock speed | 2.6 GHz | 2.6 GHz | |
Cores | Octa core | Octa core | |
Socket type | |||
LGA 2011 | |||
features | |||
Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
Supports trusted computing | Yes | Yes | |
Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
Instruction set extensions | |||
SSE2 | |||
MMX | |||
SSE4 | |||
AVX | |||
SSE3 | |||
SSE | |||
SSE4.1 | |||
SSE4.2 | |||
Supplemental SSE3 | |||
AES | |||
Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes |
details | Xeon E5-2689 | vs | E5 2650 v2 |
---|---|---|---|
Threads | 16 | 16 | |
L2 cache | 2 MB | 2 MB | |
L2 cache per core | 0.25 MB/core | 0.25 MB/core | |
L3 cache | 20 MB | 20 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 | 95W | |
Annual home energy cost | 27.7 $/year | 22.89 $/year | |
Annual commercial energy cost | 100.74 $/year | 83.22 $/year | |
Performance per watt | 10.97 pt/W | 8.85 pt/W | |
Typical power consumption | 93.44W | 77.19W | |
bus | |||
Architecture | QPI | QPI | |
Number of links | 2 | 2 | |
Data rate | 64,000 MB/s | 64,000 MB/s | |
Transfer rate | 8,000 MT/s | 8,000 MT/s | |
Clock speed | 4,000 MHz | 4,000 MHz |
Intel Xeon E5-2689 ![]() | Intel Xeon E5 2650 v2 ![]() |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$262 | ||
Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 vs E5-2689 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$2,086 | ||
Intel Xeon E5-2690 vs E5-2689 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$350 | ||
Intel Core i7 6700K vs Xeon E5-2689 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$410 | ||
Intel Xeon E5-2620 vs E5-2689 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$583 | ||
Intel Xeon E5 1650 v2 vs E5-2689 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$1,594 | ||
Intel Xeon E5-2670 vs E5-2689 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$240 | ||
Intel Core i7 3770 vs Xeon E5-2689 | ||
Popular Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$300 | $305 | |
Intel Core i5 2500 vs Xeon W3520 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$350 | $272 | |
Intel Core i7 6700K vs 4790K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
AMD A8 6410 vs Intel Core i5 4200U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
AMD A9 7th Gen A9-9410 vs Intel Core i5 6200U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$161 | $275 | |
Intel Pentium N3540 vs Core i3 4005U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$225 | $134 | |
Intel Core i3 3217U vs Celeron 847 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$180 | ||
AMD A6 5200 vs Intel Core i5 3470 | ||