Xeon Platinum 8160 vs E5-2620 v4

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon E5-2620 v4
2016
8 cores / 16 threads, 85 Watt
5.93
Xeon Platinum 8160
2017
24 cores / 48 threads, 150 Watt
18.49
+212%

Xeon Platinum 8160 outperforms Xeon E5-2620 v4 by a whopping 212% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E5-2620 v4 and Xeon Platinum 8160 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1113332
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.253.56
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesIntel Xeon E5Intel Xeon Platinum
Power efficiency6.4811.45
Architecture codenameBroadwell (2015−2019)Skylake (server) (2017−2019)
Release date20 June 2016 (8 years ago)25 April 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$417$4,702

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon Platinum 8160 has 10% better value for money than Xeon E5-2620 v4.

Detailed specifications

Xeon E5-2620 v4 and Xeon Platinum 8160 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Threads1648
Base clock speed2.1 GHz2.1 GHz
Boost clock speed3 GHz3.7 GHz
Bus typeQPIno data
Bus rate2 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier2121
L1 cacheno data1.5 MB
L2 cache2 MB24 MB
L3 cache20 MB33 MB
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Die size246.24 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature74 °C85 °C
Number of transistors3200 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E5-2620 v4 and Xeon Platinum 8160 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 configuration2 (Multiprocessor)8 (Multiprocessor)
SocketFCLGA2011FCLGA3647
Power consumption (TDP)85 Watt150 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-2620 v4 and Xeon Platinum 8160. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVX2Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technology2.02.0
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX++
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access-no data
Demand Based Switching+no data
PAE46 Bitno data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data-

Security technologies

Xeon E5-2620 v4 and Xeon Platinum 8160 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB++
Secure Key+no data
OS Guard+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-2620 v4 and Xeon Platinum 8160 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-2620 v4 and Xeon Platinum 8160. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133DDR4-2666
Maximum memory size1.5 TB768 GB
Max memory channels46
Maximum memory bandwidth68.3 GB/s128.001 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-2620 v4 and Xeon Platinum 8160.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes4048

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 E5-2620 v4 5.93
Xeon Platinum 8160 18.49
+212%

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 E5-2620 v4 9248
Xeon Platinum 8160 28825
+212%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.93 18.49
Recency 20 June 2016 25 April 2017
Physical cores 8 24
Threads 16 48
Power consumption (TDP) 85 Watt 150 Watt

Xeon E5-2620 v4 has 76.5% lower power consumption.

Xeon Platinum 8160, on the other hand, has a 211.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 months, and 200% more physical cores and 200% more threads.

The Xeon Platinum 8160 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E5-2620 v4 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-2620 v4 and Xeon Platinum 8160, 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 E5-2620 v4
Xeon E5-2620 v4
Intel Xeon Platinum 8160
Xeon Platinum 8160

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.


3.9 98 votes

Rate Xeon E5-2620 v4 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 37 votes

Rate Xeon Platinum 8160 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon E5-2620 v4 or Xeon Platinum 8160, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.