Pentium G860 vs Xeon E5-2689

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

Xeon E5-2689
2012
8 cores / 16 threads
6.41
+582%

Xeon E5-2689 outperforms Pentium G860 by a whopping 582% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E5-2689 and Pentium G860 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking9722385
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.392.12
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
SeriesXeonIntel Pentium (Desktop)
Architecture codenameno dataSandy Bridge (2011−2013)
Release date6 March 2012 (12 years ago)4 September 2011 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$75
Current price$80 $48 (0.6x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Pentium G860 has 444% better value for money than Xeon E5-2689.

Detailed specifications

Xeon E5-2689 and Pentium G860 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 speedno data3 GHz
Boost clock speed3.6 GHz3 GHz
L1 cacheno data64K (per core)
L2 cacheno data256K (per core)
L3 cacheno data3 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm32 nm
Die sizeno data131 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data69 °C
Number of transistorsno data504 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E5-2689 and Pentium G860 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 configurationno data1
Socketno dataFCLGA1155
Power consumption (TDP)115 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-2689 and Pentium G860. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NIno data+
AVXno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoringno data+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
FDIno data+
Fast Memory Accessno data+
Statusno dataDiscontinued

Security technologies

Xeon E5-2689 and Pentium G860 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-2689 and Pentium G860 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-2689 and Pentium G860. 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 data21 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel® 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 G860 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-2689 and Pentium G860.

PCIe versionno data2.0

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 6.41
+582%
Pentium G860 0.94

Xeon E5-2689 outperforms Pentium G860 by 582% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

Xeon E5-2689 9922
+580%
Pentium G860 1460

Xeon E5-2689 outperforms Pentium G860 by 580% in Passmark.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.41 0.94
Physical cores 8 2
Threads 16 2
Power consumption (TDP) 115 Watt 65 Watt

The Xeon E5-2689 is our recommended choice as it beats the Pentium G860 in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon E5-2689 is a server/workstation processor while Pentium G860 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-2689 and Pentium G860, 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 G860
Pentium G860

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 2771 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 153 votes

Rate Pentium G860 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 G860, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.