Apple M1 vs Xeon E5-2640

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon E5-2640
2012
6 cores / 12 threads, 95 Watt
3.96
Apple M1
2020
8 cores / 8 threads
5.17
+30.6%

Apple M1 outperforms Xeon E5-2640 by a substantial 31% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E5-2640 and Apple M1 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking14251192
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.66no data
Market segmentServerLaptop
Seriesno dataApple Apple M-Series
Power efficiency3.94no data
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge-EP (2012)no data
Release date6 March 2012 (12 years ago)10 November 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$162no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon E5-2640 and Apple M1 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)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads128
Base clock speed2.5 GHz2.064 GHz
Boost clock speed3 GHz3.2 GHz
Bus rate7.2 GT/sno data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)2 MB
L2 cache256 KB (per core)16 MB
L3 cache15360 KB (shared)16 MB
Chip lithography32 nm5 nm
Die size435 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature73 °Cno data
Number of transistors2,270 million16000 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E5-2640 and Apple M1 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 configuration2no data
SocketFCLGA2011no data
Power consumption (TDP)95 Wattno data

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-2640 and Apple M1. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

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

Security technologies

Xeon E5-2640 and Apple M1 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 E5-2640 and Apple M1 are enumerated here.

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 and Apple M1. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3no data
Maximum memory size384 GBno data
Max memory channels4no data
Maximum memory bandwidth42.6 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataApple M1 8-Core GPU

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-2640 and Apple M1.

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 3.96
Apple M1 5.17
+30.6%

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 6294
Apple M1 8207
+30.4%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.96 5.17
Recency 6 March 2012 10 November 2020
Physical cores 6 8
Threads 12 8
Chip lithography 32 nm 5 nm

Xeon E5-2640 has 50% more threads.

Apple M1, on the other hand, has a 30.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, 33.3% more physical cores, and a 540% more advanced lithography process.

The Apple M1 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E5-2640 in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon E5-2640 is a server/workstation processor while Apple M1 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-2640 and Apple M1, 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
Xeon E5-2640
Apple M1
M1

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 1095 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 2233 votes

Rate Apple M1 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon E5-2640 or Apple M1, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.