Winner
Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3
CPUBoss recommends the Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3 based on its value.
See full details Intel Xeon E5-4660 v3 vs E5-2650 v3 |
Released April, 2015
Intel Xeon E5-4660 v3
- 2.1 GHz
- Processing Cores
5.8 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Intel Xeon E5-4660 v3
 | Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 4 | | More cores 14 |
| | More threads 28 | | Better PassMark score 18,007 |
VS
Released July, 2014
Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3
- 2.3 GHz
- Deca core
- Unlocked
5.4 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the E5-2650 v3
| | Higher clock speed 2.3 GHz | | Much better performance per dollar 0.69 pt/$ |
| | Significantly better performance per watt 7.93 pt/W | | Lower typical power consumption 85.31W |
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of E5-4660 v3 vs E5-2650 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 | |
| 5.8 | CPUBoss Score |
Combination of all six facets | |
 | Winner |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
| |  | Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3CPUBoss Winner |
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many CPUs in SMP configuration | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| More cores | 14 | vs | 10 | 4 more cores; run more applications at once | |||
| More threads | 28 | vs | 20 | 8 more threads | |||
| Better PassMark score | 18,007 | vs | 14,951 | More than 20% better PassMark score | |||
| Slightly higher Maximum operating temperature | 82.5 °C | vs | 78.9 °C | Around 5% higher Maximum operating temperature | |||
| Newer | Apr, 2015 | vs | Jul, 2014 | Release date 9 months later | |||
| |||||||
| Higher clock speed | 2.3 GHz | vs | 2.1 GHz | Around 10% higher clock speed | |||
| Much better performance per dollar | 0.69 pt/$ | vs | 0.1 pt/$ | More than 7x better performance per dollar | |||
| Significantly better performance per watt | 7.93 pt/W | vs | 3.87 pt/W | More than 2x better performance per watt | |||
| Lower typical power consumption | 85.31W | vs | 97.5W | Around 15% lower typical power consumption | |||
| Lower annual home energy cost | 25.29 $/year | vs | 28.91 $/year | Around 15% lower annual home energy cost | |||
| Lower annual commercial energy cost | 91.98 $/year | vs | 105.12 $/year | Around 15% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E5-4660 v3 vs E5-2650 v3
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
PassMark (Single Core)
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Xeon E5-4660 v3 | vs | E5-2650 v3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 2.1 GHz | 2.3 GHz | |
| Turbo clock speed | 2.9 GHz | 3 GHz | |
| Cores | Processing Cores | Deca 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 | |
memory controller | |||
| Memory controller | Built-in | Built-in | |
| Channels | Quad Channel | Quad Channel | |
| Supports ECC | Yes | Yes | |
| Maximum memory size | 786,432 MB | 786,432 MB | |
details | Xeon E5-4660 v3 | vs | E5-2650 v3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 28 | 20 | |
| Manufacture process | 22 nm | 22 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 4 | 2 | |
| Operating temperature | Unknown - 82.5°C | Unknown - 78.9°C | |
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 | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 120W | 105W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 28.91 $/year | 25.29 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 105.12 $/year | 91.98 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 3.87 pt/W | 7.93 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 97.5W | 85.31W | |
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 | |
 Intel Xeon E5-4660 v3  Report a correction |  Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $1,155 | $1,200 | |
| 2650 v2 vs E5-2650 v3 | ||
 | VS | |
| $1,000 | $1,200 | |
| E5-2640 v3 vs E5-2650 v3 | ||
 | VS | |
| $2,086 | $1,200 | |
| E5-2690 vs E5-2650 v3 | ||
 | VS | |
| $681 | $1,200 | |
| E5-2630 v3 vs E5-2650 v3 | ||
 | VS | |
| $1,200 | ||
| E5-2689 vs E5-2650 v3 | ||
 | VS | |
| $350 | $1,200 | |
| 6700K vs E5-2650 v3 | ||
 | VS | |
| $1,166 | $1,200 | |
| E5-2650V4 vs E5-2650 v3 | ||
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 |  |
| $180 | ||
| 5200 vs 3470 | ||
 | VS | |
| $350 | ||
| 7th Gen A12-9700P vs 6700K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $50 | $125 | |
| 5300 vs 3220 | ||
