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 E7320

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon E7320

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 4 MB vs 1 MB 4x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 32 vs 1 31 supports more CPUs in SMP configuration
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 4x more l2 cache per core
Much lower typical power consumption 65W vs 105.63W Around 40% lower typical power consumption
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 70.08 $/year vs 113.88 $/year Around 40% lower annual commercial energy cost
Much lower annual home energy cost 19.27 $/year vs 31.32 $/year Around 40% lower annual home energy cost
Front view of Intel Xeon E5-1620

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon E5-1620

Report a correction
Much higher clock speed 3.6 GHz vs 2.13 GHz Around 70% higher clock speed
Much better PassMark score 9,487 vs 2,413 Around 4x better PassMark score
Much better PassMark (Single core) score 2,117 vs 751 More than 2.8x better PassMark (Single core) score
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.93 GHz vs 2.13 GHz Around 85% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Much better performance per watt 7.47 pt/W vs 1.14 pt/W More than 6.5x better performance per watt
Much better performance per dollar 3.3 pt/$ vs 0.07 pt/$ Around 44.2x better performance per dollar
Significantly newer manufacturing process 32 nm vs 65 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Supports trusted computing Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing
More threads 8 vs 4 Twice as many threads
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.7 GHz vs 2.13 GHz Around 2.2x better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Newer Mar, 2012 vs Sep, 2007 Release date over 4 years later

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E7320 vs E5-1620

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Xeon E7320
2,413
Xeon E5-1620
9,487

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon E7320  vs
E5-1620 
Clock speed 2.13 GHz 3.6 GHz
Cores Quad core Quad core
Socket type
604
LGA 2011

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing No Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
AVX
SSE3
SSE
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
Supplemental SSE3
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 80W 130W
Annual home energy cost 19.27 $/year 31.32 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 70.08 $/year 113.88 $/year
Performance per watt 1.14 pt/W 7.47 pt/W
Typical power consumption 65W 105.63W

details

Xeon E7320  vs
E5-1620 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 8
L2 cache 4 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 1 MB/core 0.25 MB/core
Manufacture process 65 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 32 1
Clock multiplier 8 38
Voltage range 1 - 1.5V 0.6 - 1.35V
Operating temperature Unknown - 66°C Unknown - 64°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.13 GHz 3.93 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.13 GHz 4.7 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.13 GHz 3.93 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

bus

Architecture FSB QPI
Number of links 1 0
Clock speed 1,066 MHz 0 MHz
Intel Xeon E7320
Report a correction
Intel Xeon E5-1620
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus