Xeon E5-2603 v2 vs E5-2650 v4

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon E5-2650 v4
2016
12 cores / 24 threads, 105 Watt
8.51
+395%
Xeon E5-2603 v2
2013
4 cores / 4 threads, 80 Watt
1.72

Xeon E5-2650 v4 outperforms Xeon E5-2603 v2 by a whopping 395% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E5-2650 v4 and Xeon E5-2603 v2 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking8972048
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.600.47
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesIntel Xeon E5no data
Power efficiency7.672.03
Architecture codenameBroadwell-EP (2016)Ivy Bridge-EP (2013)
Release date16 March 2016 (8 years ago)1 September 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,166$240

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon E5-2650 v4 has 453% better value for money than Xeon E5-2603 v2.

Detailed specifications

Xeon E5-2650 v4 and Xeon E5-2603 v2 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 GHz1.8 GHz
Boost clock speed2.9 GHz1.8 GHz
Bus typeQPIno data
Bus rate2 × 9.6 GT/s6.4 GT/s
Multiplier22no data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache256 KB (per core)256 KB (per core)
L3 cache30 MB (shared)10 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm22 nm
Die size306.18 mm2160 mm2
Maximum core temperature80 °C71 °C
Number of transistors3,400 million1,400 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E5-2650 v4 and Xeon E5-2603 v2 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)2
SocketFCLGA2011FCLGA2011
Power consumption (TDP)105 Watt80 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-2650 v4 and Xeon E5-2603 v2. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVX2Intel® AVX
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology2.0-
Hyper-Threading Technology+-
TSX+-
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Flex Memory Access--
Demand Based Switching++
PAE46 Bit46 Bit

Security technologies

Xeon E5-2650 v4 and Xeon E5-2603 v2 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB++
Secure Key++
OS Guard++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-2650 v4 and Xeon E5-2603 v2 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 Xeon E5-2603 v2. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133, DDR4-2400DDR3
Maximum memory size1.5 TB768 GB
Max memory channels44
Maximum memory bandwidth76.8 GB/s42.6 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 Xeon E5-2603 v2.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes4040

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 8.51
+395%
Xeon E5-2603 v2 1.72

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 13515
+394%
Xeon E5-2603 v2 2735

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.51 1.72
Recency 16 March 2016 1 September 2013
Physical cores 12 4
Threads 24 4
Chip lithography 14 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 105 Watt 80 Watt

Xeon E5-2650 v4 has a 394.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, 200% more physical cores and 500% more threads, and a 57.1% more advanced lithography process.

Xeon E5-2603 v2, on the other hand, has 31.3% lower power consumption.

The Xeon E5-2650 v4 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E5-2603 v2 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-2650 v4 and Xeon E5-2603 v2, 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 Xeon E5-2603 v2
Xeon E5-2603 v2

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 1684 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
1.4 5 votes

Rate Xeon E5-2603 v2 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 Xeon E5-2603 v2, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.