CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of E5620 vs 4365 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

4.8

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
AMD Opteron 4365 

CPUBoss recommends the AMD Opteron 4365  based on its performance and cost to run.

See full details

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 E5620

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon E5620

Report a correction
Much higher clock speed 2.4 GHz vs 2 GHz Around 20% higher clock speed
Much more l3 cache 12 MB vs 8 MB 50% more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later
Much better performance per watt 7.59 pt/W vs 3.84 pt/W More than 95% better performance per watt
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.75 GHz vs 2.8 GHz Around 35% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Much more l3 cache per core 3 MB/core vs 1 MB/core 3x more l3 cache per core
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.33 GHz vs 2.8 GHz Around 55% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of AMD Opteron 4365

Reasons to consider the
AMD Opteron 4365

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 8 MB vs 1 MB 8x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
More cores 8 vs 4 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 4x more l2 cache per core
Significantly lower typical power consumption 32.5W vs 65W 2x lower typical power consumption
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost 35.04 $/year vs 70.08 $/year 2x lower annual commercial energy cost
Significantly lower annual home energy cost 9.64 $/year vs 19.27 $/year 2x lower annual home energy cost
Newer Nov, 2012 vs Mar, 2010 Release date over 2 years later

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E5620 vs Opteron 4365

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Xeon E5620
4,873
Opteron 4365
5,025

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon E5620  vs
Opteron 4365 
Clock speed 2.4 GHz 2 GHz
Cores Quad core Octa core
Socket type
LGA 1366
AM2

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
SSE2
MMX
SSE4
SSE3
SSE
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
Supplemental SSE3
AES

power consumption

TDP 80W 40W
Annual home energy cost 19.27 $/year 9.64 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 70.08 $/year 35.04 $/year
Performance per watt 7.59 pt/W 3.84 pt/W
Typical power consumption 65W 32.5W

bus

Architecture QPI HyperTransport 3.0
Transfer rate 5,860 MT/s 6,400 MT/s
Clock speed 2,930 MHz 3,200 MHz

details

Xeon E5620  vs
Opteron 4365 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 8 8
L2 cache 1 MB 8 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 1 MB/core
L3 cache 12 MB 8 MB
L3 cache per core 3 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 2 2
Operating temperature Unknown - 77.6°C Unknown - 70°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 3.75 GHz 2.8 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.33 GHz 2.8 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.75 GHz 2.8 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
Intel Xeon E5620
Report a correction
AMD Opteron 4365
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus