Atom C3558 vs Xeon E5-2650 v4

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon E5-2650 v4
2016
12 cores / 24 threads, 105 Watt
8.86
+457%

Xeon E5-2650 v4 outperforms Atom C3558 by a whopping 457% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E5-2650 v4 and Atom C3558 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking8812120
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.610.47
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesIntel Xeon E5Intel Atom
Power efficiency7.699.06
Architecture codenameBroadwell-EP (2016)Goldmont (2016−2017)
Release date20 June 2016 (8 years ago)15 August 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,166$86

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon E5-2650 v4 has 455% better value for money than Atom C3558.

Detailed specifications

Xeon E5-2650 v4 and Atom C3558 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 cores12 (Dodeca-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads244
Base clock speed2.2 GHz2.2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.9 GHz2.2 GHz
Bus typeQPIno data
Bus rate2 × 9.6 GT/sno data
Multiplier2222
L1 cache64 KB (per core)224 KB
L2 cache3 MB8 MB
L3 cache30 MB (shared)8 MB
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Die size306.18 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature80 °C83 °C
Number of transistors4700 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E5-2650 v4 and Atom C3558 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)1 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFCLGA2011FCBGA1310
Power consumption (TDP)105 Watt16 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-2650 v4 and Atom C3558. 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)++
QuickAssistno data+
Turbo Boost Technology2.0-
Hyper-Threading Technology+-
TSX+-
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access-no data
Demand Based Switching+no data
PAE46 Bitno data

Security technologies

Xeon E5-2650 v4 and Atom C3558 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB++
Secure Bootno data+
Secure Key++
SGXno data-
OS Guard++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-2650 v4 and Atom C3558 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-2650 v4 and Atom C3558. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133, DDR4-2400DDR4: 2133
Maximum memory size1.5 TB256 GB
Max memory channels42
Maximum memory bandwidth76.8 GB/s29.871 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardN/Ano data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-2650 v4 and Atom C3558.

PCIe version3.03
PCI Express lanes4012
USB revisionno data3
Total number of SATA portsno data12
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Portsno data12
Number of USB portsno data8
Integrated LANno data2x10/2.5/1 GBE + 2x2.5/1 GBE

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 E5-2650 v4 8.86
+457%
Atom C3558 1.59

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 E5-2650 v4 13563
+458%
Atom C3558 2431

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.86 1.59
Recency 20 June 2016 15 August 2017
Physical cores 12 4
Threads 24 4
Power consumption (TDP) 105 Watt 16 Watt

Xeon E5-2650 v4 has a 457.2% higher aggregate performance score, and 200% more physical cores and 500% more threads.

Atom C3558, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 556.3% lower power consumption.

The Xeon E5-2650 v4 is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom C3558 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-2650 v4 and Atom C3558, 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 E5-2650 v4
Xeon E5-2650 v4
Intel Atom C3558
Atom C3558

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.


4.5 1619 votes

Rate Xeon E5-2650 v4 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 1 vote

Rate Atom C3558 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon E5-2650 v4 or Atom C3558, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.