Intel Xeon E5-2699 v3 vs E5-2689 |
Released July, 2014
Intel Xeon E5-2699 v3
- 2.3 GHz
- Processing Cores
Reasons to buy the Intel Xeon E5-2699 v3
 | Much more l3 cache 45 MB | | More threads 36 |
| | Newer manufacturing process 22 nm | | Newer Jul, 2014 |
VS
Released March, 2012
Intel Xeon E5-2689
- 2.6 GHz
- Octa core
Reasons to buy the E5-2689
| | Much higher clock speed 2.6 GHz | | Significantly lower typical power consumption 93.44W |
| | Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost 100.74 $/year | | Significantly lower annual home energy cost 27.7 $/year |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Much more l3 cache | 45 MB | vs | 20 MB | 2.2x more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| More threads | 36 | vs | 16 | 20 more threads | |||
| Newer manufacturing process | 22 nm | vs | 32 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
| Newer | Jul, 2014 | vs | Mar, 2012 | Release date over 2 years later | |||
| |||||||
| Much higher clock speed | 2.6 GHz | vs | 2.3 GHz | Around 15% higher clock speed | |||
| Significantly lower typical power consumption | 93.44W | vs | 117.81W | More than 20% lower typical power consumption | |||
| Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost | 100.74 $/year | vs | 127.02 $/year | More than 20% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
| Significantly lower annual home energy cost | 27.7 $/year | vs | 34.93 $/year | More than 20% lower annual home energy cost | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E5-2699 v3 vs E5-2689
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
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
PassMark (Single Core)
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Xeon E5-2699 v3 | vs | E5-2689 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 2.3 GHz | 2.6 GHz | |
| Cores | Processing Cores | Octa core | |
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Supports trusted computing | Yes | Yes | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| MMX | |||
| AVX | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE | |||
| SSE4.1 | |||
| SSE4.2 | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| AES | |||
| AVX 2.0 | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
details | Xeon E5-2699 v3 | vs | E5-2689 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Threads | 36 | 16 | |
| L3 cache | 45 MB | 20 MB | |
| L3 cache per core | 2.5 MB/core | 2.5 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 22 nm | 32 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 2 | 2 | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 145W | 115W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 34.93 $/year | 27.7 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 127.02 $/year | 100.74 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 10.09 pt/W | 10.97 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 117.81W | 93.44W | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | QPI | QPI | |
| Number of links | 2 | 2 | |
| Data rate | 76,800 MB/s | 64,000 MB/s | |
| Transfer rate | 9,600 MT/s | 8,000 MT/s | |
| Clock speed | 4,800 MHz | 4,000 MHz | |
 Intel Xeon E5-2699 v3  Report a correction |  Intel Xeon E5-2689 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $2,086 | ||
| E5-2690 vs E5-2689 | ||
 | VS | |
| $1,155 | ||
| 2650 v2 vs E5-2689 | ||
 | VS | |
| $350 | ||
| 6700K vs E5-2689 | ||
 | VS | |
| $240 | ||
| 3770 vs E5-2689 | ||
 | VS | |
| Ryzen™ 5 1600 vs E5-2689 | ||
 | VS | |
| $901 | ||
| E5-2640 vs E5-2689 | ||
 | VS | |
| $583 | ||
| 1650 v2 vs E5-2689 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $300 | $305 | |
| 2500 vs W3520 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 7th Gen A9-9410 vs 6200U | ||
| | VS |  |
| $350 | $272 | |
| 6700K vs 4790K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 6410 vs 4200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $161 | $275 | |
| N3540 vs 4005U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $180 | ||
| 5200 vs 3470 | ||
 | VS | |
| $350 | ||
| 7th Gen A12-9700P vs 6700K | ||
