Xeon Gold 6226R vs E5-4669 v3

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon E5-4669 v3
2015
18 cores / 36 threads, 135 Watt
11.27
Xeon Gold 6226R
2020
16 cores / 32 threads, 150 Watt
17.00
+50.8%

Gold 6226R outperforms E5-4669 v3 by an impressive 51% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E5-4669 v3 and Xeon Gold 6226R processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking647350
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.5812.44
Market segmentServerServer
Seriesno dataIntel Xeon Gold
Architecture codenameHaswell-EP (2014)Cascade Lake (2019−2020)
Release date1 June 2015 (9 years ago)24 February 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$1,300
Current price$60 $1774 (1.4x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon Gold 6226R has 247% better value for money than Xeon E5-4669 v3.

Detailed specifications

Xeon E5-4669 v3 and Xeon Gold 6226R 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 cores18 (Octadeca-Core)16 (Hexadeca-Core)
Threads3632
Base clock speed2.1 GHz2.9 GHz
Boost clock speed2.9 GHz3.9 GHz
Bus supportno data4 × 8 GT/s
L1 cache64K (per core)1 MB
L2 cache256K (per core)16 MB
L3 cache45 MB (shared)22 MB
Chip lithography22 nm14 nm
Die size356 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature88 °C85 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)88 °Cno data
Number of transistors2,600 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E5-4669 v3 and Xeon Gold 6226R 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 configuration4no data
SocketFCLGA2011FCLGA3647
Power consumption (TDP)135 Watt150 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-4669 v3 and Xeon Gold 6226R. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVX2Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512
AES-NI++
AVX++
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technology2.02.0
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX-+
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+no data
Flex Memory Access-no data
PAE46 Bitno data
Instruction Replay-no data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data-
StatusDiscontinuedLaunched

Security technologies

Xeon E5-4669 v3 and Xeon Gold 6226R technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

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

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-4669 v3 and Xeon Gold 6226R are enumerated here.

VT-d++
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-4669 v3 and Xeon Gold 6226R. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR4-2933
Maximum memory size768 GB1 TB
Max memory channels46
Maximum memory bandwidth68 GB/s140.8 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-4669 v3 and Xeon Gold 6226R.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes4048

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 E5-4669 v3 11.27
Xeon Gold 6226R 17.00
+50.8%

Gold 6226R outperforms E5-4669 v3 by 51% based on our aggregate 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 E5-4669 v3 17430
Xeon Gold 6226R 26297
+50.9%

Gold 6226R outperforms E5-4669 v3 by 51% in Passmark.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.27 17.00
Recency 1 June 2015 24 February 2020
Physical cores 18 16
Threads 36 32
Chip lithography 22 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 135 Watt 150 Watt

The Xeon Gold 6226R is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E5-4669 v3 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-4669 v3 and Xeon Gold 6226R, 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 E5-4669 v3
Xeon E5-4669 v3
Intel Xeon Gold 6226R
Xeon Gold 6226R

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 4 votes

Rate Xeon E5-4669 v3 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.5 13 votes

Rate Xeon Gold 6226R on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon E5-4669 v3 or Xeon Gold 6226R, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.