Xeon Platinum 8165 vs E5-2692 v2
Primary details
Comparing Xeon E5-2692 v2 and Xeon Platinum 8165 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 956 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Power efficiency | 7.22 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Ivy Bridge-EP (2013) | no data |
| Release date | 1 September 2013 (11 years ago) | 1 October 2017 (7 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Xeon E5-2692 v2 and Xeon Platinum 8165 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) | 24 (Tetracosa-Core) |
| Threads | 24 | 48 |
| Base clock speed | 2.2 GHz | 2.3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3 GHz | 3.7 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | no data |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | no data |
| L3 cache | 30 MB (shared) | 33 MB |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 160 mm2 | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,400 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon E5-2692 v2 and Xeon Platinum 8165 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 | no data |
| Socket | 2011 | FCLGA3647 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 205 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-2692 v2 and Xeon Platinum 8165. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | - |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Speed Shift | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| TSX | - | + |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | - |
Security technologies
Xeon E5-2692 v2 and Xeon Platinum 8165 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-2692 v2 and Xeon Platinum 8165 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-2692 v2 and Xeon Platinum 8165. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR4-2666 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 768 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 6 |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-2692 v2 and Xeon Platinum 8165.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 48 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 September 2013 | 1 October 2017 |
| Physical cores | 12 | 24 |
| Threads | 24 | 48 |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 205 Watt |
Xeon E5-2692 v2 has 105% lower power consumption.
Xeon Platinum 8165, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 57.1% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Xeon E5-2692 v2 and Xeon Platinum 8165. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-2692 v2 and Xeon Platinum 8165, 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.
