Xeon E-2456 vs Platinum 8256

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon Platinum 8256
2018
4 cores / 8 threads, 105 Watt
10.57
Xeon E-2456
2023
6 cores / 12 threads, 80 Watt
14.96
+41.5%

Xeon E-2456 outperforms Xeon Platinum 8256 by a considerable 42% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon Platinum 8256 and Xeon E-2456 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking732470
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.7293.11
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesIntel Xeon Platinumno data
Power efficiency9.5317.70
Architecture codenameCascade Lake-SP (2018)Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)
Release date11 December 2018 (5 years ago)14 December 2023 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$7,007$375

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon E-2456 has 5313% better value for money than Xeon Platinum 8256.

Detailed specifications

Xeon Platinum 8256 and Xeon E-2456 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads812
Base clock speed3.8 GHz3.3 GHz
Boost clock speed3.9 GHz5.1 GHz
Bus rateno data16 GT/s
Multiplier38no data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)80 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)1.25 MB (per core)
L3 cache16.5 MB (shared)18 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nmIntel 7 nm
Die sizeno data163 mm2
Maximum core temperature72 °C100 °C
Number of transistors8,000 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data

Compatibility

Information on Xeon Platinum 8256 and Xeon E-2456 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 configuration8 (Multiprocessor)1
SocketFCLGA3647FCLGA1700
Power consumption (TDP)105 Watt80 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon Platinum 8256 and Xeon E-2456. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shift+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.02
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX+-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0--
Deep Learning Boost+-

Security technologies

Xeon Platinum 8256 and Xeon E-2456 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB++
Secure Keyno data+
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon Platinum 8256 and Xeon E-2456 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon Platinum 8256 and Xeon E-2456. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2933DDR5-4800
Maximum memory size1 TB128 GB
Max memory channels62
Maximum memory bandwidth140.8 GB/sno data
ECC memory support++

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardN/AN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon Platinum 8256 and Xeon E-2456.

PCIe version3.05
PCI Express lanes4816

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 Platinum 8256 10.57
Xeon E-2456 14.96
+41.5%

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 Platinum 8256 16787
Xeon E-2456 23770
+41.6%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.57 14.96
Recency 11 December 2018 14 December 2023
Physical cores 4 6
Threads 8 12
Power consumption (TDP) 105 Watt 80 Watt

Xeon E-2456 has a 41.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, 50% more physical cores and 50% more threads, and 31.3% lower power consumption.

The Xeon E-2456 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon Platinum 8256 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon Platinum 8256 and Xeon E-2456, 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 Platinum 8256
Xeon Platinum 8256
Intel Xeon E-2456
Xeon E-2456

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.


1 1 vote

Rate Xeon Platinum 8256 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Xeon E-2456 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon Platinum 8256 or Xeon E-2456, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.