Ryzen 7 2700X vs Xeon E5-2697 v2

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

Xeon E5-2697 v2
2013
12 cores / 24 threads
9.24
Ryzen 7 2700X
2018
8 cores / 16 threads
11.34
+22.7%

Ryzen 7 2700X outperforms Xeon E5-2697 v2 by 23% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary Details

Comparing Xeon E5-2697 v2 and Ryzen 7 2700X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking756621
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation21.8527.09
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Xeon (Desktop)AMD Ryzen 7
Architecture codenameIvy Bridge-EP (2013)Zen+ (2018−2020)
Release date1 September 2013 (10 years ago)19 April 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,723$329
Current price$73 (0x MSRP)$162 (0.5x MSRP)

Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen 7 2700X has 24% better value for money than Xeon E5-2697 v2.

Detailed Specifications

Xeon E5-2697 v2 and Ryzen 7 2700X 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 cores12 (Dodeca-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads2416
Base clock speed2.7 GHz3.7 GHz
Boost clock speed3.5 GHz4.35 GHz
Bus support8GT/sno data
L1 cache64K (per core)96K (per core)
L2 cache256K (per core)512K (per core)
L3 cache30 MB (shared)16 MB (shared)
Chip lithography22 nm12 nm
Die size160 mm2192 mm2
Maximum core temperature86 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,400 million4,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierNoYes

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E5-2697 v2 and Ryzen 7 2700X 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 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFCLGA2011AM4
Power consumption (TDP)130 Watt105 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-2697 v2 and Ryzen 7 2700X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVXSSE4.2, SSE4A, AMD-V, AES, AVX2, FMA3, SHA
AES-NI++
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
TSX-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+no data
Flex Memory Access-no data
Demand Based Switching+no data
PAE46 Bitno data
StatusDiscontinuedno data

Security technologies

Xeon E5-2697 v2 and Ryzen 7 2700X technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data
Secure Key+no data
Identity Protection-no data
OS Guard+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-2697 v2 and Ryzen 7 2700X are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-2697 v2 and Ryzen 7 2700X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4 Dual-channel
Maximum memory size768 GB64 GB
Max memory channels42
Maximum memory bandwidth59.7 GB/s46.933 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-2697 v2 and Ryzen 7 2700X.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes4020

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 E5-2697 v2 9.24
Ryzen 7 2700X 11.34
+22.7%

Ryzen 7 2700X outperforms Xeon E5-2697 v2 by 23% 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 E5-2697 v2 14287
Ryzen 7 2700X 17533
+22.7%

Ryzen 7 2700X outperforms Xeon E5-2697 v2 by 23% in Passmark.

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Xeon E5-2697 v2 554
Ryzen 7 2700X 1246
+125%

Ryzen 7 2700X outperforms Xeon E5-2697 v2 by 125% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Xeon E5-2697 v2 4289
Ryzen 7 2700X 6101
+42.2%

Ryzen 7 2700X outperforms Xeon E5-2697 v2 by 42% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

Xeon E5-2697 v2 4173
Ryzen 7 2700X 5256
+26%

Ryzen 7 2700X outperforms Xeon E5-2697 v2 by 26% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Xeon E5-2697 v2 34776
+0%
Ryzen 7 2700X 34763

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Xeon E5-2697 v2 8843
Ryzen 7 2700X 10643
+20.4%

Ryzen 7 2700X outperforms Xeon E5-2697 v2 by 20% in 3DMark06 CPU.

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

Xeon E5-2697 v2 12.31
Ryzen 7 2700X 3.48
+254%

Xeon E5-2697 v2 outperforms Ryzen 7 2700X by 254% in wPrime 32.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

Xeon E5-2697 v2 18
Ryzen 7 2700X 19
+6.1%

Ryzen 7 2700X outperforms Xeon E5-2697 v2 by 6% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

Xeon E5-2697 v2 1550
Ryzen 7 2700X 1762
+13.7%

Ryzen 7 2700X outperforms Xeon E5-2697 v2 by 14% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

Xeon E5-2697 v2 105
Ryzen 7 2700X 176
+67.3%

Ryzen 7 2700X outperforms Xeon E5-2697 v2 by 67% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

Xeon E5-2697 v2 1.25
Ryzen 7 2700X 1.95
+56%

Ryzen 7 2700X outperforms Xeon E5-2697 v2 by 56% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Xeon E5-2697 v2 8.7
Ryzen 7 2700X 10.6
+21.8%

Ryzen 7 2700X outperforms Xeon E5-2697 v2 by 22% in TrueCrypt AES.

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Xeon E5-2697 v2 7269
+52.1%
Ryzen 7 2700X 4779

Xeon E5-2697 v2 outperforms Ryzen 7 2700X by 52% in WinRAR 4.0.

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Xeon E5-2697 v2 165
Ryzen 7 2700X 227
+37.6%

Ryzen 7 2700X outperforms Xeon E5-2697 v2 by 38% in x264 encoding pass 1.

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Xeon E5-2697 v2 85
Ryzen 7 2700X 105
+22.7%

Ryzen 7 2700X outperforms Xeon E5-2697 v2 by 23% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Gaming performance

Pros & Cons Summary


Performance score 9.24 11.34
Recency 1 September 2013 19 April 2018
Physical cores 12 8
Threads 24 16
Cost $1723 $329
Chip lithography 22 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 130 Watt 105 Watt

The Ryzen 7 2700X is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E5-2697 v2 in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon E5-2697 v2 is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen 7 2700X is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-2697 v2 and Ryzen 7 2700X, 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 E5-2697 v2
Xeon E5-2697 v2
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
Ryzen 7 2700X

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.


4.4 671 vote

Rate Xeon E5-2697 v2 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 2689 votes

Rate Ryzen 7 2700X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & Сomments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon E5-2697 v2 or Ryzen 7 2700X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.