i3-6100E vs Xeon E5-2620

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon E5-2620
2012
6 cores / 12 threads, 95 Watt
3.33
+59.3%
Core i3-6100E
2015
2 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
2.09

Xeon E5-2620 outperforms Core i3-6100E by an impressive 59% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E5-2620 and Core i3-6100E processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking15741879
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.730.23
Market segmentServerLaptop
Seriesno dataIntel Core i3
Power efficiency3.325.65
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge-EP (2012)Skylake (2015−2016)
Release date6 March 2012 (12 years ago)12 October 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$36$225

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon E5-2620 has 652% better value for money than i3-6100E.

Detailed specifications

Xeon E5-2620 and Core i3-6100E 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 cores6 (Hexa-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads124
Base clock speed2 GHzno data
Boost clock speed2.5 GHz2.7 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 3.0
Bus rate7.2 GT/s4 × 8 GT/s
Multiplierno data27
L1 cache64 KB (per core)128 KB
L2 cache256 KB (per core)512 KB
L3 cache15360 KB (shared)3 MB
Chip lithography32 nm14 nm
Die size435 mm298.57 mm2
Maximum core temperature77 °Cno data
Number of transistors2,270 million1750 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E5-2620 and Core i3-6100E 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 configuration21 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFCLGA2011no data
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-2620 and Core i3-6100E. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVXno data
AES-NI++
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology1.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
TSX-+
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access-no data
Demand Based Switching+no data

Security technologies

Xeon E5-2620 and Core i3-6100E technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-2620 and Core i3-6100E are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-2620 and Core i3-6100E. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3LPDDR3-1866
Maximum memory size384 GB64 GB
Max memory channels42
Maximum memory bandwidth42.6 GB/s34.134 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel HD Graphics 530

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-2620 and Core i3-6100E.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes4016

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 3.33
+59.3%
i3-6100E 2.09

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 5291
+59.6%
i3-6100E 3315

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.33 2.09
Recency 6 March 2012 12 October 2015
Physical cores 6 2
Threads 12 4
Chip lithography 32 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 35 Watt

Xeon E5-2620 has a 59.3% higher aggregate performance score, and 200% more physical cores and 200% more threads.

i3-6100E, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 128.6% more advanced lithography process, and 171.4% lower power consumption.

The Xeon E5-2620 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i3-6100E in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon E5-2620 is a server/workstation processor while Core i3-6100E is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-2620 and Core i3-6100E, 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
Xeon E5-2620
Intel Core i3-6100E
Core i3-6100E

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.


4 515 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Core i3-6100E on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon E5-2620 or Core i3-6100E, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.