Xeon E5-2620 v3 vs E3-1585 v5
Aggregate performance score
Xeon E3-1585 v5 outperforms Xeon E5-2620 v3 by a small 8% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Xeon E3-1585 v5 and Xeon E5-2620 v3 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1152 | 1209 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.01 | no data |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Series | Intel Xeon E3 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Skylake-H (2015−2016) | Haswell-EP (2014−2015) |
| Release date | 31 May 2016 (8 years ago) | 8 September 2014 (10 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $556 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Xeon E3-1585 v5 and Xeon E5-2620 v3 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 cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | 3.5 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.9 GHz | 3.2 GHz |
| Bus type | DMI 3.0 | no data |
| Bus rate | 4 × 8 GT/s | 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | 35 | no data |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 256K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 8 MB (shared) | 15 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 22 nm |
| Die size | 171 mm2 | 356 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | 73 °C |
| Number of transistors | 2,300 million | 2,600 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon E3-1585 v5 and Xeon E5-2620 v3 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 configuration | 1 (Uniprocessor) | 2 |
| Socket | FCBGA1440 | FCLGA2011 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 85 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E3-1585 v5 and Xeon E5-2620 v3. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 | Intel® AVX2 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| eDRAM | 128 MB | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | + |
| TSX | + | - |
| Idle States | + | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Flex Memory Access | no data | - |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | + |
| PAE | no data | 46 Bit |
| FDI | + | no data |
| Status | Discontinued | Discontinued |
Security technologies
Xeon E3-1585 v5 and Xeon E5-2620 v3 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | + |
| EDB | + | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| OS Guard | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E3-1585 v5 and Xeon E5-2620 v3 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E3-1585 v5 and Xeon E5-2620 v3. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3L,LPDDR3 1600 MHz, DDR4 2133 MHz at 1.2V | DDR4-1600, DDR4-1866 |
| Maximum memory size | 64 GB | 768 GB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 4 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 34.134 GB/s | 59 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | + | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 | no data |
| Max video memory | 64 GB | no data |
| Quick Sync Video | + | - |
| Clear Video | + | no data |
| Graphics max frequency | 1.15 GHz | no data |
| Execution Units | 72 | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Xeon E3-1585 v5 and Xeon E5-2620 v3 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 3 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E3-1585 v5 and Xeon E5-2620 v3.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 40 |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 5.45 | 5.06 |
| Recency | 31 May 2016 | 8 September 2014 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 6 |
| Threads | 8 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 22 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 85 Watt |
Xeon E3-1585 v5 has a 7.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 57.1% more advanced lithography process, and 30.8% lower power consumption.
Xeon E5-2620 v3, on the other hand, has 50% more physical cores and 50% more threads.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Xeon E3-1585 v5 and Xeon E5-2620 v3.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E3-1585 v5 and Xeon E5-2620 v3, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
