Xeon X3460 vs E5-2620

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon E5-2620
2012
6 cores / 12 threads, 95 Watt
3.46
+78.4%

Xeon E5-2620 outperforms Xeon X3460 by an impressive 78% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E5-2620 and Xeon X3460 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking15691973
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.73no data
Market segmentServerServer
Power efficiency3.321.86
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge-EP (2012)no data
Release date6 March 2012 (12 years ago)1 July 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$36no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon E5-2620 and Xeon X3460 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads128
Base clock speed2 GHz2.8 GHz
Boost clock speed2.5 GHz3.46 GHz
Bus rate7.2 GT/sno data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache256 KB (per core)no data
L3 cache15360 KB (shared)8 MB Intel® Smart Cache
Chip lithography32 nm45 nm
Die size435 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature77 °C73 °C
Number of transistors2,270 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E5-2620 and Xeon X3460 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
SocketFCLGA2011FCLGA1156,LGA1156
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-2620 and Xeon X3460. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVXIntel® SSE4.2
AES-NI+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology1.01.0
Hyper-Threading Technology++
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access-no data
Demand Based Switching++
PAEno data36 Bit

Security technologies

Xeon E5-2620 and Xeon X3460 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-2620 and Xeon X3460 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-2620 and Xeon X3460. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3-800, DDR3-1066, DDR3-1333
Maximum memory size384 GB32 GB
Max memory channels42
Maximum memory bandwidth42.6 GB/s21 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-2620 and Xeon X3460.

PCIe version3.02.0
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 3.46
+78.4%
Xeon X3460 1.94

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
+78%
Xeon X3460 2972

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Xeon E5-2620 404
Xeon X3460 473
+17.1%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Xeon E5-2620 1956
+32.5%
Xeon X3460 1476

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.46 1.94
Recency 6 March 2012 1 July 2009
Physical cores 6 4
Threads 12 8
Chip lithography 32 nm 45 nm

Xeon E5-2620 has a 78.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, 50% more physical cores and 50% more threads, and a 40.6% more advanced lithography process.

The Xeon E5-2620 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon X3460 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-2620 and Xeon X3460, 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 Xeon X3460
Xeon X3460

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
4.2 102 votes

Rate Xeon X3460 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 Xeon X3460, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.