Xeon E5-4648 V3 vs E5-2680 v4

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon E5-2680 v4
2016
14 cores / 28 threads, 120 Watt
11.15
+95.6%
Xeon E5-4648 V3
2015
12 cores / 24 threads, 105 Watt
5.70

Xeon E5-2680 v4 outperforms Xeon E5-4648 V3 by an impressive 96% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E5-2680 v4 and Xeon E5-4648 V3 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking6951130
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.94no data
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesIntel Xeon (Desktop)no data
Power efficiency8.795.14
Architecture codenameBroadwell-EP (2016)Haswell-EP (2014−2015)
Release date20 June 2016 (8 years ago)1 June 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,745no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon E5-2680 v4 and Xeon E5-4648 V3 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 cores14 (Tetradeca-Core)12 (Dodeca-Core)
Threads2824
Base clock speed2.4 GHz1.7 GHz
Boost clock speed3.3 GHz2.2 GHz
Bus typeQPIno data
Bus rate2 × 9.6 GT/sno data
Multiplier24no data
L1 cache448 KB64K (per core)
L2 cache3.5 MB256K (per core)
L3 cache35 MB30 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm22 nm
Die size306.18 mm2356 mm2
Maximum core temperature86 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data87 °C
Number of transistors4700 Million2,600 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E5-2680 v4 and Xeon E5-4648 V3 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)4
SocketFCLGA20112011-3
Power consumption (TDP)120 Watt105 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-2680 v4 and Xeon E5-4648 V3. 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)++
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 E5-2680 v4 and Xeon E5-4648 V3 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

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

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-2680 v4 and Xeon E5-4648 V3 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-2680 v4 and Xeon E5-4648 V3. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133, DDR4-2400DDR4-1866
Maximum memory size1.5 TBno data
Max memory channels4no data
Maximum memory bandwidth76.8 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-2680 v4 and Xeon E5-4648 V3.

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 E5-2680 v4 11.15
+95.6%
Xeon E5-4648 V3 5.70

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 E5-2680 v4 17710
+95.5%
Xeon E5-4648 V3 9061

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.15 5.70
Recency 20 June 2016 1 June 2015
Physical cores 14 12
Threads 28 24
Chip lithography 14 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 120 Watt 105 Watt

Xeon E5-2680 v4 has a 95.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, 16.7% more physical cores and 16.7% more threads, and a 57.1% more advanced lithography process.

Xeon E5-4648 V3, on the other hand, has 14.3% lower power consumption.

The Xeon E5-2680 v4 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E5-4648 V3 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-2680 v4 and Xeon E5-4648 V3, 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 E5-2680 v4
Xeon E5-2680 v4
Intel Xeon E5-4648 V3
Xeon E5-4648 V3

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 4011 votes

Rate Xeon E5-2680 v4 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Xeon E5-4648 V3 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon E5-2680 v4 or Xeon E5-4648 V3, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.