Ryzen Embedded 8640U vs Xeon E5-2658 V3
Primary details
Comparing Xeon E5-2658 V3 and Ryzen Embedded 8640U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 884 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Power efficiency | 7.65 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Haswell-EP (2014−2015) | Hawk Point (2024) |
| Release date | 8 September 2014 (10 years ago) | 2 April 2024 (less than a year ago) |
Detailed specifications
Xeon E5-2658 V3 and Ryzen Embedded 8640U 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 cores | 12 (Dodeca-Core) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 24 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | 2.2 GHz | 3.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.9 GHz | 4.9 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64K (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 256K (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 30 MB (shared) | 16 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 4 nm |
| Die size | 356 mm2 | 178 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 2,600 million | 25,000 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon E5-2658 V3 and Ryzen Embedded 8640U 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 configuration | 2 | 1 |
| Socket | 2011-3 | FP8 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 105 Watt | 28 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-2658 V3 and Ryzen Embedded 8640U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| TSX | + | - |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Security technologies
Xeon E5-2658 V3 and Ryzen Embedded 8640U technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-2658 V3 and Ryzen Embedded 8640U are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-2658 V3 and Ryzen Embedded 8640U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-2133 | DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon 760M |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-2658 V3 and Ryzen Embedded 8640U.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 40 | 20 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 8 September 2014 | 2 April 2024 |
| Physical cores | 12 | 6 |
| Threads | 24 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 105 Watt | 28 Watt |
Xeon E5-2658 V3 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
Ryzen Embedded 8640U, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 9 years, a 450% more advanced lithography process, and 275% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Xeon E5-2658 V3 and Ryzen Embedded 8640U. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Xeon E5-2658 V3 is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen Embedded 8640U is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-2658 V3 and Ryzen Embedded 8640U, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
