0 Comments
| Intel Xeon E5-2690 vs Core i7 6700K |
Released March, 2012
Intel Xeon E5-2690
- 2.9 GHz
- Octa core
Reasons to buy the Intel Xeon E5-2690
![]() | Significantly more l2 cache 2 MB | ![]() | Significantly more l3 cache 20 MB |
![]() | More cores 8 | ![]() | Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 2 |
VS
Released July, 2015
Intel Core i7 6700K
- 4 GHz
- Quad core
- Unlocked
Reasons to buy the Core i7 6700K
![]() | Significantly higher clock speed 4 GHz | ![]() | Much newer manufacturing process 14 nm |
![]() | Has a built-in GPU Yes | ![]() | Higher turbo clock speed 4.2 GHz |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
Significantly 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 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Significantly 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 | |||
More cores | 8 | vs | 4 | Twice as many cores; run more applications at once | |||
Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration | 2 | vs | 1 | Twice as many CPUs in SMP configuration | |||
More threads | 16 | vs | 8 | Twice as many threads | |||
Supports trusted computing | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing | |||
Significantly better performance per watt | 7.64 pt/W | vs | 3.49 pt/W | Around 2.2x better performance per watt | |||
Better PassMark score | 14,178 | vs | 11,109 | Around 30% better PassMark score | |||
Supports more RAM | 393,216 MB | vs | 65,536 MB | Supports 6x more RAM | |||
More l3 cache per core | 2.5 MB/core | vs | 2 MB/core | 25% more l3 cache per core | |||
Higher Maximum operating temperature | 72 °C | vs | 64 °C | Around 15% higher Maximum operating temperature | |||
| |||||||
Significantly higher clock speed | 4 GHz | vs | 2.9 GHz | Around 40% higher clock speed | |||
Much newer manufacturing process | 14 nm | vs | 32 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
Has a built-in GPU | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required | |||
Higher turbo clock speed | 4.2 GHz | vs | 3.8 GHz | More than 10% higher turbo clock speed | |||
Much lower typical power consumption | 73.94W | vs | 109.69W | Around 35% lower typical power consumption | |||
Significantly better performance per dollar | 0.91 pt/$ | vs | 0.49 pt/$ | Around 85% better performance per dollar | |||
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.61 GHz | vs | 3.53 GHz | More than 30% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
Better PassMark (Single core) score | 2,349 | vs | 1,853 | More than 25% better PassMark (Single core) score | |||
Newer | Jul, 2015 | vs | Mar, 2012 | Release date over 3 years later | |||
Much lower annual home energy cost | 21.92 $/year | vs | 32.52 $/year | Around 35% lower annual home energy cost | |||
Much lower annual commercial energy cost | 79.72 $/year | vs | 118.26 $/year | Around 35% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.77 GHz | vs | 3.92 GHz | More than 20% better overclocked clock speed (Water) |
Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E5-2690 vs Core i7 6700K
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Xeon E5-2690
28,226
Core i7 6700K
17,583
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Xeon E5-2690
2,646
Core i7 6700K
4,510
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Xeon E5-2690
1,975,000 MB/s
Core i7 6700K
6,010 MB/s
GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Xeon E5-2690
20,376
Core i7 6700K
17,169
GeekBench
Xeon E5-2690
31,327
Core i7 6700K
17,169
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
Xeon E5-2690
14,178
Core i7 6700K
11,109
PassMark (Single Core)
Xeon E5-2690
1,853
Core i7 6700K
2,349
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Xeon E5-2690 | vs | Core i7 6700K |
---|---|---|---|
Clock speed | 2.9 GHz | 4 GHz | |
Turbo clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 4.2 GHz | |
Cores | Octa core | Quad core | |
features | |||
Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
Supports trusted computing | Yes | No | |
Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
Instruction set extensions | |||
SSE2 | |||
MMX | |||
SSE4 | |||
AVX | |||
SSE3 | |||
SSE | |||
SSE4.1 | |||
SSE4.2 | |||
Supplemental SSE3 | |||
AES | |||
AVX 2.0 | |||
Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
power consumption | |||
TDP | 135W | 91W | |
Annual home energy cost | 32.52 $/year | 21.92 $/year | |
Annual commercial energy cost | 118.26 $/year | 79.72 $/year | |
Performance per watt | 7.64 pt/W | 3.49 pt/W | |
Typical power consumption | 109.69W | 73.94W | |
bus | |||
Architecture | QPI | FSB | |
Number of links | 2 | 0 | |
Transfer rate | 8,000 MT/s | 8,000 MT/s |
details | Xeon E5-2690 | vs | Core i7 6700K |
---|---|---|---|
Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
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 | 8 MB | |
L3 cache per core | 2.5 MB/core | 2 MB/core | |
Manufacture process | 32 nm | 14 nm | |
Max CPUs | 2 | 1 | |
Operating temperature | Unknown - 72°C | Unknown - 64°C | |
overclocking | |||
Overclocked clock speed | 3.53 GHz | 4.61 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 3.92 GHz | 4.77 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.53 GHz | 4.61 GHz | |
integrated graphics | |||
GPU | None | GPU | |
Label | N/A | Intel® HD Graphics 530 | |
Number of displays supported | N/A | 3 | |
GPU clock speed | N/A | 350 MHz | |
Turbo clock speed | N/A | 1,150 MHz | |
memory controller | |||
Memory controller | Built-in | Built-in | |
Memory type | |||
DDR3-1600 | |||
DDR3L-1600 | |||
DDR3-1333 | |||
DDR3-1066 | |||
DDR3 | |||
DDR3-800 | |||
Channels | Quad Channel | Dual Channel | |
Supports ECC | Yes | No | |
Maximum bandwidth | 51,200 MB/s | 25,600 MB/s | |
Maximum memory size | 393,216 MB | 65,536 MB |
Intel Xeon E5-2690 ![]() | Intel Core i7 6700K ![]() |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$350 | $272 | |
6700K vs 4790K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$350 | $250 | |
6700K vs 6600K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$350 | ||
6700K vs 7th Gen A12-9700P | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$350 | $390 | |
6700K vs 5820K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$350 | $305 | |
6700K vs 6700 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$350 | ||
6700K vs 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$350 | $230 | |
6700K vs 9590 | ||
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 | ![]() |
$248 | $230 | |
4770K vs 9590 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$250 | $350 | |
6600K vs 6700K | ||