CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of E5620 vs 2600 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

7.9

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Core i7 2600 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core i7 2600  based on its performance and single-core performance.

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 lower typical power consumption 65W vs 114.5W Around 45% lower typical power consumption
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
Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 2 vs 1 Twice as many CPUs in SMP configuration
Significantly more l3 cache per core 3 MB/core vs 2 MB/core 50% more l3 cache per core
Much lower annual home energy cost 19.27 $/year vs 41.87 $/year 2.2x lower annual home energy cost
Supports more RAM 294,912 MB vs 32,768 MB Supports 9x more RAM
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 70.08 $/year vs 112.13 $/year Around 40% lower annual commercial energy cost
Better performance per watt 7.59 pt/W vs 6.48 pt/W More than 15% better performance per watt
Higher Maximum operating temperature 77.6 °C vs 72.6 °C More than 5% higher Maximum operating temperature
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.33 GHz vs 3.92 GHz More than 10% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of Intel Core i7 2600

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i7 2600

Report a correction
Significantly higher clock speed 3.4 GHz vs 2.4 GHz More than 40% higher clock speed
Significantly higher turbo clock speed 3.8 GHz vs 2.66 GHz Around 45% higher turbo clock speed
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Significantly better PassMark (Single core) score 1,921 vs 1,059 More than 80% better PassMark (Single core) score
Much better performance per dollar 2.72 pt/$ vs 2.18 pt/$ More than 25% better performance per dollar
Better PassMark score 8,219 vs 4,873 Around 70% better PassMark score
Slightly better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.93 GHz vs 3.75 GHz Around 5% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Newer Jan, 2011 vs Mar, 2010 Release date 9 months later

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E5620 vs Core i7 2600

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E5620
14,086
Core i7 2600
10,986

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E5620
1,898
Core i7 2600
2,876

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E5620
1,280,000 MB/s
Core i7 2600
2,470,000 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E5620
8,737
Core i7 2600
11,071

GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E5620
11,417
Core i7 2600
11,820

GeekBench

Xeon E5620
11,417
Core i7 2600
14,233

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Xeon E5620
4,873
Core i7 2600
8,219

PassMark (Single Core)

Xeon E5620
1,059
Core i7 2600
1,921

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon E5620  vs
Core i7 2600 
Clock speed 2.4 GHz 3.4 GHz
Turbo clock speed 2.66 GHz 3.8 GHz
Cores Quad core Quad core
Socket type
LGA 1366
LGA 1155

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE4
AVX
SSE3
SSE
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
Supplemental SSE3
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 80W 95W
Annual home energy cost 19.27 $/year 41.87 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 70.08 $/year 112.13 $/year
Performance per watt 7.59 pt/W 6.48 pt/W
Typical power consumption 65W 114.5W

bus

Architecture QPI DMI
Number of links 2 1
Data rate 46,928 MB/s 8 MB/s
Transfer rate 5,860 MT/s 5,000 MT/s

details

Xeon E5620  vs
Core i7 2600 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 8 8
L2 cache 1 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 0.25 MB/core
L3 cache 12 MB 8 MB
L3 cache per core 3 MB/core 2 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 2 1
Clock multiplier 18 34
Voltage range 0.75 - 1.35V 1.22 - 1.43V
Operating temperature Unknown - 77.6°C Unknown - 72.6°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 3.75 GHz 3.93 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.33 GHz 3.92 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.75 GHz 3.93 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU None GPU
Label N/A Intel® HD Graphics 2000
Latest DirectX N/A 10.x
Number of displays supported N/A 2
GPU clock speed N/A 850 MHz
Turbo clock speed N/A 1,350 MHz

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1333
DDR3-1066
DDR3-800
DDR3
Channels Triple Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC Yes No
Maximum bandwidth 25,599.99 MB/s 21,333.32 MB/s
Maximum memory size 294,912 MB 32,768 MB
Intel Xeon E5620
Report a correction
Intel Core i7 2600
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus