Xeon Silver 4510 vs Gold 6126

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon Gold 6126
2017
12 cores / 24 threads, 125 Watt
12.08
Xeon Silver 4510
2023
12 cores / 24 threads, 150 Watt
21.51
+78.1%

Xeon Silver 4510 outperforms Xeon Gold 6126 by an impressive 78% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon Gold 6126 and Xeon Silver 4510 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking643252
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.25100.00
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesIntel Xeon Goldno data
Power efficiency9.1513.58
Architecture codenameSkylake (server) (2017−2018)Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024)
Release date25 April 2017 (7 years ago)14 December 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,776$563

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon Silver 4510 has 2253% better value for money than Xeon Gold 6126.

Detailed specifications

Xeon Gold 6126 and Xeon Silver 4510 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)12 (Dodeca-Core)
Threads2424
Base clock speed2.6 GHz2.4 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz4.1 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier26no data
L1 cache768 KB80 KB (per core)
L2 cache12 MB2 MB (per core)
L3 cache19.25 MB30 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nmIntel 7 nm
Maximum core temperature86 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data84 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data

Compatibility

Information on Xeon Gold 6126 and Xeon Silver 4510 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 configuration4 (Multiprocessor)2
SocketFCLGA3647FCLGA4677
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt150 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon Gold 6126 and Xeon Silver 4510. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512Intel® AMX, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shift++
Turbo Boost Technology2.02.0
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX++
Turbo Boost Max 3.0-no data
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Xeon Gold 6126 and Xeon Silver 4510 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB++
SGXno dataYes with Intel® SPS
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon Gold 6126 and Xeon Silver 4510 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon Gold 6126 and Xeon Silver 4510. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2666DDR5 @ 4400 MT/s (1 DPC &2DPC)
Maximum memory size768 GB4 TB
Max memory channels68
Maximum memory bandwidth128.001 GB/sno data
ECC memory support++

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon Gold 6126 and Xeon Silver 4510.

PCIe version3.05
PCI Express lanes4880

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 Gold 6126 12.08
Xeon Silver 4510 21.51
+78.1%

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 Gold 6126 19189
Xeon Silver 4510 34170
+78.1%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 12.08 21.51
Recency 25 April 2017 14 December 2023
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 150 Watt

Xeon Gold 6126 has 20% lower power consumption.

Xeon Silver 4510, on the other hand, has a 78.1% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 6 years.

The Xeon Silver 4510 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon Gold 6126 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon Gold 6126 and Xeon Silver 4510, 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 Gold 6126
Xeon Gold 6126
Intel Xeon Silver 4510
Xeon Silver 4510

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.


3.8 4 votes

Rate Xeon Gold 6126 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Xeon Silver 4510 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon Gold 6126 or Xeon Silver 4510, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.