EPYC 7H12 vs Xeon E5-1620

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon E5-1620
2012
4 cores / 8 threads, 130 Watt
3.79
EPYC 7H12
2019
64 cores / 128 threads, 280 Watt
45.02
+1088%

EPYC 7H12 outperforms Xeon E5-1620 by a whopping 1088% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E5-1620 and EPYC 7H12 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking138737
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.2222.05
Market segmentServerServer
Seriesno dataAMD EPYC
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge-E (2011−2013)Zen 2 (2019−2020)
Release dateMarch 2012 (12 years ago)18 September 2019 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$313no data
Current price$44 (0.1x MSRP)$1970

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

EPYC 7H12 has 423% better value for money than Xeon E5-1620.

Detailed specifications

Xeon E5-1620 and EPYC 7H12 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core)
Threads8128
Base clock speed3.6 GHz2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed3.8 GHz3.3 GHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)96K (per core)
L2 cache256 KB (per core)512K (per core)
L3 cache10240 KB (shared)256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm7 nm, 14 nm
Die size294 mm2192 mm2
Maximum core temperature64 °Cno data
Number of transistors1270 million4,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierNoYes

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E5-1620 and EPYC 7H12 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 configuration12 (Multiprocessor)
SocketFCLGA2011TR4
Power consumption (TDP)130 Watt280 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-1620 and EPYC 7H12. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVXno data
AES-NI++
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+no data
Flex Memory Access-no data
Demand Based Switching+no data
StatusDiscontinuedno data

Security technologies

Xeon E5-1620 and EPYC 7H12 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data
Identity Protection-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-1620 and EPYC 7H12 are enumerated here.

AMD-Vno data+
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-1620 and EPYC 7H12. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4 Eight-channel
Maximum memory size375 GB4 TiB
Max memory channels48
Maximum memory bandwidth51.2 GB/s204.763 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-1620 and EPYC 7H12.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes40no 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 E5-1620 3.79
EPYC 7H12 45.02
+1088%

EPYC 7H12 outperforms Xeon E5-1620 by 1088% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

Xeon E5-1620 5856
EPYC 7H12 69633
+1089%

EPYC 7H12 outperforms Xeon E5-1620 by 1089% in Passmark.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.79 45.02
Physical cores 4 64
Threads 8 128
Chip lithography 32 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 130 Watt 280 Watt

The EPYC 7H12 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E5-1620 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-1620 and EPYC 7H12, 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 E5-1620
Xeon E5-1620
AMD EPYC 7H12
EPYC 7H12

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.


4.4 159 votes

Rate Xeon E5-1620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 450 votes

Rate EPYC 7H12 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon E5-1620 or EPYC 7H12, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.