Apple M4 Max (14 cores) vs Xeon E5-2608L v4
Primary details
Comparing Xeon E5-2608L v4 and Apple M4 Max (14 cores) processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1278 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.48 | no data |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Xeon E5 | Apple M4 |
| Power efficiency | 8.88 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Broadwell (2015−2019) | no data |
| Release date | 20 June 2016 (8 years ago) | 30 November 2024 (recently) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $363 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Xeon E5-2608L v4 and Apple M4 Max (14 cores) 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 | 8 (Octa-Core) | 14 (Tetradeca-Core) |
| Threads | 16 | 14 |
| Boost clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 4.51 GHz |
| Bus type | QPI | no data |
| Bus rate | 2 × 6.4 GT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | 16 | no data |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | no data |
| L3 cache | 20 MB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 3 nm |
| Die size | 246.24 mm2 | no data |
| Number of transistors | 3200 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon E5-2608L v4 and Apple M4 Max (14 cores) 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 | 2 (Multiprocessor) | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 80 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-2608L v4 and Apple M4 Max (14 cores). You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| vPro | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| TSX | + | - |
Security technologies
Xeon E5-2608L v4 and Apple M4 Max (14 cores) technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-2608L v4 and Apple M4 Max (14 cores). Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Maximum memory size | 1,536 GB | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Apple M4 32-core GPU |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-2608L v4 and Apple M4 Max (14 cores).
| PCIe version | 3.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 40 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 20 June 2016 | 30 November 2024 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 14 |
| Threads | 16 | 14 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 3 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 80 Watt |
Xeon E5-2608L v4 has 14.3% more threads, and 60% lower power consumption.
Apple M4 Max (14 cores), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 years, 75% more physical cores, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Xeon E5-2608L v4 and Apple M4 Max (14 cores). We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Xeon E5-2608L v4 is a mobile workstation processor while Apple M4 Max (14 cores) is a mobile workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-2608L v4 and Apple M4 Max (14 cores), 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.
