Xeon D-1602 vs W3565

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon W3565
2009
4 cores / 8 threads, 130 Watt
2.18
+37.1%

W3565 outperforms D-1602 by a substantial 37% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon W3565 and Xeon D-1602 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking18372082
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.6613.12
Market segmentServerServer
Seriesno dataIntel Xeon D
Architecture codenameBloomfield (2008−2010)Broadwell (2015−2019)
Release date1 November 2009 (14 years ago)2 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$70$106

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon D-1602 has 132% better value for money than Xeon W3565.

Detailed specifications

Xeon W3565 and Xeon D-1602 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads84
Base clock speed3.2 GHz2.5 GHz
Boost clock speed3.46 GHz3.2 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 2.0
Multiplierno data25
L1 cache64 KB (per core)128 KB
L2 cache256 KB (per core)512 KB
L3 cache8 MB (shared)3 MB
Chip lithography45 nm14 nm
Die size263 mm2246.24 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
Number of transistors731 million3200 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Xeon W3565 and Xeon D-1602 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 configuration11 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFCLGA1366FCBGA1667
Power consumption (TDP)130 Watt27 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon W3565 and Xeon D-1602. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2Intel® AVX2
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
QuickAssistno data-
Turbo Boost Technology1.02.0
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX-+
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring-+
Demand Based Switching+no data
PAE36 Bitno data
GPIOno data+
AMTno dataSPS 3.0
StatusDiscontinuedLaunched
Quiet Systemno data-

Security technologies

Xeon W3565 and Xeon D-1602 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

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

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon W3565 and Xeon D-1602 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon W3565 and Xeon D-1602. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4, DDR3
Maximum memory size24 GB128 GB
Max memory channels32
Maximum memory bandwidth25.6 GB/s34.124 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardN/Ano data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon W3565 and Xeon D-1602.

PCIe version2.02.0/3.0
PCI Express lanesno data32
USB revisionno data2.0/3.0
Total number of SATA portsno data6
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Portsno data6
Number of USB portsno data8
Integrated LANno data-
UARTno 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 W3565 2.18
+37.1%
Xeon D-1602 1.59

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 W3565 3366
+36.9%
Xeon D-1602 2459

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.18 1.59
Recency 1 November 2009 2 April 2019
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 8 4
Chip lithography 45 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 130 Watt 27 Watt

Xeon W3565 has a 37.1% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

Xeon D-1602, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 9 years, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 381.5% lower power consumption.

The Xeon W3565 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon D-1602 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon W3565 and Xeon D-1602, 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 W3565
Xeon W3565
Intel Xeon D-1602
Xeon D-1602

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 77 votes

Rate Xeon W3565 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Xeon D-1602 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon W3565 or Xeon D-1602, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.