Xeon E5-2620 v2 vs D-1587

Aggregate performance score

Xeon D-1587
2016
16 cores / 32 threads, 65 Watt
8.54
+117%
Xeon E5-2620 v2
2013
6 cores / 12 threads, 80 Watt
3.93

Xeon D-1587 outperforms Xeon E5-2620 v2 by a whopping 117% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon D-1587 and Xeon E5-2620 v2 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking8951447
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.111.51
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesIntel Xeon Dno data
Power efficiency12.434.65
Architecture codenameBroadwell (2015−2019)Ivy Bridge-EP (2013)
Release date24 February 2016 (8 years ago)1 September 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,443$417

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon D-1587 has 40% better value for money than Xeon E5-2620 v2.

Detailed specifications

Xeon D-1587 and Xeon E5-2620 v2 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores16 (Hexadeca-Core)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads3212
Base clock speed1.7 GHz2.1 GHz
Boost clock speed2.3 GHz2.6 GHz
Bus typeDMI 2.0no data
Bus rateno data7.2 GT/s
Multiplier17no data
L1 cache64K (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache256K (per core)256 KB (per core)
L3 cache1.5 MB (per core)15 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm22 nm
Die size306.18 mm2160 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data71 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)80 °Cno data
Number of transistors3,200 million1,400 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Xeon D-1587 and Xeon E5-2620 v2 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration1 (Uniprocessor)2
SocketFCBGA1667FCLGA2011
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt80 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon D-1587 and Xeon E5-2620 v2. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVX2Intel® AVX
AES-NI++
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology2.02.0
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX+-
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Flex Memory Accessno data-
Demand Based Switchingno data+
PAEno data46 Bit
GPIO+no data

Security technologies

Xeon D-1587 and Xeon E5-2620 v2 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB++
Secure Key++
OS Guard++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon D-1587 and Xeon E5-2620 v2 are enumerated here.

VT-d++
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon D-1587 and Xeon E5-2620 v2. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4, DDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size128 GB768 GB
Max memory channels24
Maximum memory bandwidth34.124 GB/s51.2 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon D-1587 and Xeon E5-2620 v2.

PCIe version2.0/3.03.0
PCI Express lanes2440
USB revision2.0/3.0no data
Total number of SATA ports6no data
Number of USB ports8no data
Integrated LAN+no data
UART+no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Xeon D-1587 8.54
+117%
Xeon E5-2620 v2 3.93

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Xeon D-1587 13566
+117%
Xeon E5-2620 v2 6242

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.54 3.93
Recency 24 February 2016 1 September 2013
Physical cores 16 6
Threads 32 12
Chip lithography 14 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 80 Watt

Xeon D-1587 has a 117.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, 166.7% more physical cores and 166.7% more threads, a 57.1% more advanced lithography process, and 23.1% lower power consumption.

The Xeon D-1587 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E5-2620 v2 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon D-1587 and Xeon E5-2620 v2, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Xeon D-1587
Xeon D-1587
Intel Xeon E5-2620 v2
Xeon E5-2620 v2

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Xeon D-1587 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 691 vote

Rate Xeon E5-2620 v2 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon D-1587 or Xeon E5-2620 v2, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.