Xeon Platinum 8268 vs X5690

Aggregate performance score

Xeon X5690
2011
6 cores / 12 threads, 130 Watt
4.60
Xeon Platinum 8268
2018
24 cores / 48 threads, 205 Watt
22.53
+390%

Xeon Platinum 8268 outperforms Xeon X5690 by a whopping 390% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon X5690 and Xeon Platinum 8268 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1317238
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.785.66
Market segmentServerServer
Seriesno dataIntel Xeon Platinum
Power efficiency3.2310.02
Architecture codenameWestmere-EP (2010−2011)Cascade Lake-SP (2018−2019)
Release date14 February 2011 (13 years ago)11 December 2018 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$205$6,302

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon Platinum 8268 has 50% better value for money than Xeon X5690.

Detailed specifications

Xeon X5690 and Xeon Platinum 8268 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 cores6 (Hexa-Core)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Threads1248
Base clock speed3.46 GHz2.9 GHz
Boost clock speed3.73 GHz3.9 GHz
Multiplierno data29
L1 cache64 KB (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache256 KB (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache12288 KB (shared)35.75 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm14 nm
Die size239 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature79 °C84 °C
Number of transistors1,170 million8,000 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Xeon X5690 and Xeon Platinum 8268 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 configuration28 (Multiprocessor)
SocketFCLGA1366,LGA1366FCLGA3647
Power consumption (TDP)130 Watt205 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon X5690 and Xeon Platinum 8268. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512
AES-NI++
AVX-+
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technology1.02.0
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX-+
Idle States+no data
Demand Based Switching+no data
PAE40 Bitno data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data-
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Xeon X5690 and Xeon Platinum 8268 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon X5690 and Xeon Platinum 8268 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon X5690 and Xeon Platinum 8268. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4-2933
Maximum memory size288 GB1 TB
Max memory channels36
Maximum memory bandwidth32 GB/s140.8 GB/s
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 X5690 and Xeon Platinum 8268.

PCIe version2.03.0
PCI Express lanesno data48

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 X5690 4.60
Xeon Platinum 8268 22.53
+390%

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 X5690 7046
Xeon Platinum 8268 34483
+389%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.60 22.53
Recency 14 February 2011 11 December 2018
Physical cores 6 24
Threads 12 48
Chip lithography 32 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 130 Watt 205 Watt

Xeon X5690 has 57.7% lower power consumption.

Xeon Platinum 8268, on the other hand, has a 389.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 128.6% more advanced lithography process.

The Xeon Platinum 8268 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon X5690 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon X5690 and Xeon Platinum 8268, 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 X5690
Xeon X5690
Intel Xeon Platinum 8268
Xeon Platinum 8268

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.


4.6 450 votes

Rate Xeon X5690 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 58 votes

Rate Xeon Platinum 8268 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon X5690 or Xeon Platinum 8268, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.