Xeon E5-2658 vs W-2123

Aggregate performance score

Xeon W-2123
2017
4 cores / 8 threads, 120 Watt
5.33
+39.5%
Xeon E5-2658
2012
8 cores / 16 threads, 95 Watt
3.82

Xeon W-2123 outperforms Xeon E5-2658 by a considerable 40% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon W-2123 and Xeon E5-2658 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking11681458
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation8.520.38
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesIntel Xeon Wno data
Power efficiency4.203.81
Architecture codenameSkylake (server) (2017−2018)Sandy Bridge-EP (2012)
Release date29 August 2017 (7 years ago)6 March 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$294$1,462

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon W-2123 has 2142% better value for money than Xeon E5-2658.

Detailed specifications

Xeon W-2123 and Xeon E5-2658 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)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads816
Base clock speed3.6 GHz2.1 GHz
Boost clock speed3.9 GHz2.4 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier36no data
L1 cache64K (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)256 KB (per core)
L3 cache8.25 MB (shared)20480 KB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm32 nm
Die size484 mm2435 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)64 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data2,270 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+-

Compatibility

Information on Xeon W-2123 and Xeon E5-2658 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)2
SocketFCLGA20662011
Power consumption (TDP)120 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon W-2123 and Xeon E5-2658. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512no data
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shift+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX+-
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access-no data
Demand Based Switching+no data
PAE46 Bitno data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0-no data

Security technologies

Xeon W-2123 and Xeon E5-2658 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

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

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon W-2123 and Xeon E5-2658 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon W-2123 and Xeon E5-2658. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133, DDR4-2400, DDR4-2666DDR3
Maximum memory size512 GBno data
Max memory channels4no data
Maximum memory bandwidth85.33 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon W-2123 and Xeon E5-2658.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes48no data

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 W-2123 5.33
+39.5%
Xeon E5-2658 3.82

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 W-2123 8472
+39.5%
Xeon E5-2658 6073

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.33 3.82
Recency 29 August 2017 6 March 2012
Physical cores 4 8
Threads 8 16
Chip lithography 14 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 120 Watt 95 Watt

Xeon W-2123 has a 39.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 128.6% more advanced lithography process.

Xeon E5-2658, on the other hand, has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and 26.3% lower power consumption.

The Xeon W-2123 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E5-2658 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon W-2123 and Xeon E5-2658, 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 W-2123
Xeon W-2123
Intel Xeon E5-2658
Xeon E5-2658

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.


3.2 30 votes

Rate Xeon W-2123 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 4 votes

Rate Xeon E5-2658 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon W-2123 or Xeon E5-2658, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.