Ryzen Embedded V1500B vs Xeon E5-2640 v4

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon E5-2640 v4
2016
10 cores / 20 threads, 90 Watt
7.88
+170%
Ryzen Embedded V1500B
4 cores / 8 threads, 16 Watt
2.92

Xeon E5-2640 v4 outperforms Ryzen Embedded V1500B by a whopping 170% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E5-2640 v4 and Ryzen Embedded V1500B processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking9551664
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.76no data
Market segmentServerLaptop
SeriesIntel Xeon E5AMD Ryzen Embedded
Power efficiency8.2917.27
Architecture codenameBroadwell (2015−2019)Zen (2017−2020)
Release date20 June 2016 (8 years ago)no data
Launch price (MSRP)$939no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon E5-2640 v4 and Ryzen Embedded V1500B 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 cores10 (Deca-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads208
Base clock speed2.4 GHzno data
Boost clock speed3.4 GHz2.2 GHz
Bus typeQPIno data
Bus rate2 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier2422
L1 cacheno data384 KB
L2 cache2.5 MB2 MB
L3 cache25 MB4 MB
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Die size246.24 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature76 °Cno data
Number of transistors3200 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E5-2640 v4 and Ryzen Embedded V1500B 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)no data
SocketFCLGA2011no data
Power consumption (TDP)90 Watt16 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-2640 v4 and Ryzen Embedded V1500B. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVX2no data
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
TSX+-
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access-no data
Demand Based Switching+no data
PAE46 Bitno data

Security technologies

Xeon E5-2640 v4 and Ryzen Embedded V1500B technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

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

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-2640 v4 and Ryzen Embedded V1500B are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-2640 v4 and Ryzen Embedded V1500B. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133DDR4-2400
Maximum memory size1.5 TB32 GB
Max memory channels42
Maximum memory bandwidth68.3 GB/s38.397 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-2640 v4 and Ryzen Embedded V1500B.

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 E5-2640 v4 7.88
+170%
Ryzen Embedded V1500B 2.92

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 E5-2640 v4 12514
+170%
Ryzen Embedded V1500B 4633

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.88 2.92
Physical cores 10 4
Threads 20 8
Power consumption (TDP) 90 Watt 16 Watt

Xeon E5-2640 v4 has a 169.9% higher aggregate performance score, and 150% more physical cores and 150% more threads.

Ryzen Embedded V1500B, on the other hand, has 462.5% lower power consumption.

The Xeon E5-2640 v4 is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen Embedded V1500B in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon E5-2640 v4 is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen Embedded V1500B is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-2640 v4 and Ryzen Embedded V1500B, 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 E5-2640 v4
Xeon E5-2640 v4
AMD Ryzen Embedded V1500B
Ryzen Embedded V1500B

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.


4.2 971 vote

Rate Xeon E5-2640 v4 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 45 votes

Rate Ryzen Embedded V1500B on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon E5-2640 v4 or Ryzen Embedded V1500B, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.