Pentium G620 vs Xeon E5-2689

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon E5-2689
2012
8 cores / 16 threads, 115 Watt
6.25
+722%
Pentium G620
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.76

Xeon E5-2689 outperforms Pentium G620 by a whopping 722% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E5-2689 and Pentium G620 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking10692639
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data7.43
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
SeriesXeonno data
Power efficiency5.141.11
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge-EP (2012)Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
Release date6 March 2012 (12 years ago)22 May 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$60

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon E5-2689 and Pentium G620 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads162
Base clock speed2.6 GHz2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed3.6 GHz2.6 GHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache256 KB (per core)256 KB (per core)
L3 cache20 MB (shared)3 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm32 nm
Die size435 mm2131 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data69 °C
Number of transistors2,270 million504 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E5-2689 and Pentium G620 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 configuration21
Socket2011FCLGA1155
Power consumption (TDP)115 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-2689 and Pentium G620. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI++
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
FDIno data+
Fast Memory Accessno data+

Security technologies

Xeon E5-2689 and Pentium G620 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+-
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-2689 and Pentium G620 are enumerated here.

VT-d+-
VT-x++
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-2689 and Pentium G620. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data32 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data17 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardN/AIntel® HD Graphics for 2nd Generation Intel® Processors
Graphics max frequencyno data1.1 GHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Xeon E5-2689 and Pentium G620 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-2689 and Pentium G620.

PCIe version3.02.0
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 E5-2689 6.25
+722%
Pentium G620 0.76

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 E5-2689 9922
+718%
Pentium G620 1213

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.25 0.76
Recency 6 March 2012 22 May 2011
Physical cores 8 2
Threads 16 2
Power consumption (TDP) 115 Watt 65 Watt

Xeon E5-2689 has a 722.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 months, and 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads.

Pentium G620, on the other hand, has 76.9% lower power consumption.

The Xeon E5-2689 is our recommended choice as it beats the Pentium G620 in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon E5-2689 is a server/workstation processor while Pentium G620 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-2689 and Pentium G620, 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 E5-2689
Xeon E5-2689
Intel Pentium G620
Pentium G620

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.


4.3 3029 votes

Rate Xeon E5-2689 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 510 votes

Rate Pentium G620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon E5-2689 or Pentium G620, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.