CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of E5-2695 v3 vs E5-2690 v3 among all CPUs

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more

Integrated Graphics

Integrated GPU performance for graphics

Sky Diver and Cloud Gate

Integrated Graphics (OpenCL)

Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing

CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more

Performance per Watt

How efficiently does the processor use electricity?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

No winner declared

Too close to call

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 E5-2695 v3

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon E5-2695 v3

Report a correction
Much more l3 cache 35 MB vs 30 MB More than 15% more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later
More threads 28 vs 24 4 more threads
Lower typical power consumption 97.5W vs 109.69W More than 10% lower typical power consumption
Lower annual commercial energy cost 105.12 $/year vs 118.26 $/year More than 10% lower annual commercial energy cost
Lower annual home energy cost 28.91 $/year vs 32.52 $/year More than 10% lower annual home energy cost
Front view of Intel Xeon E5-2690 v3

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon E5-2690 v3

Report a correction
Much higher clock speed 2.6 GHz vs 2.3 GHz Around 15% higher clock speed
Higher turbo clock speed 3.5 GHz vs 3.3 GHz More than 5% higher turbo clock speed
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.13 GHz vs 2.91 GHz Around 10% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) 3 GHz vs 2.78 GHz Around 10% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E5-2695 v3 vs E5-2690 v3

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E5-2695 v3
3,020 MB/s
Xeon E5-2690 v3
2,865,000 MB/s

Cinebench R10 32-Bit

Cinebench R10 32-Bit (Single Core)

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon E5-2695 v3  vs
E5-2690 v3 
Clock speed 2.3 GHz 2.6 GHz
Turbo clock speed 3.3 GHz 3.5 GHz
Cores Processing Cores Duodeca core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
AES
AVX
AVX 2.0
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 120W 135W
Annual home energy cost 28.91 $/year 32.52 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 105.12 $/year 118.26 $/year
Performance per watt 5.19 pt/W 10.63 pt/W
Typical power consumption 97.5W 109.69W

bus

Architecture QPI QPI
Number of links 2 2
Data rate 76,800 MB/s 76,800 MB/s
Transfer rate 9,600 MT/s 9,600 MT/s
Clock speed 4,800 MHz 4,800 MHz

details

Xeon E5-2695 v3  vs
E5-2690 v3 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 28 24
L3 cache 35 MB 30 MB
L3 cache per core 2.5 MB/core 2.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nm 22 nm
Max CPUs 2 2
Operating temperature Unknown - 82.6°C Unknown - 89.9°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.91 GHz 3.13 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.78 GHz 3 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.91 GHz 3.13 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
DDR
Channels Quad Channel Quad Channel
Supports ECC Yes Yes
Maximum bandwidth 6,400 MB/s 6,400 MB/s
Maximum memory size 786,432 MB 786,432 MB
Intel Xeon E5-2695 v3
Report a correction
Intel Xeon E5-2690 v3
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus