Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Percent Faster: Xeon E5s Vs. Xeon 5600s

Intel Xeon E5-2600: Doing Damage With Two Eight-Core CPUs
By

When we compile the results from all of our tests and compare two Xeon E5-2687Ws to two Xeon X5680s, we see that the E5s are, on average about 21% faster.

Some of those tests aren’t good representations of what a professional would do on a workstation, though. Lame is in there explicitly to show the difference between these CPUs with a single core active, for example. The compression tests are pretty lightweight, and the transcoding tests don’t really necessitate a dual-processor machine. So, let’s take all of that out and see where we end up:

Now we’re closer to a 23% improvement. Euler3D skews the E5’s advantage quite a bit, but so do curiously-low numbers from Blender’s new cycles rendering engine and the SolidWorks 2010 render.

Regardless, more than 20% is significant for money-making applications.

Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the UK Article comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

Display all 4 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
  • 0 Hide
    may1 , 7 March 2012 07:48
    Why is it that they never test out games on these CPUs... oh wait.
  • 1 Hide
    devBunny , 7 March 2012 08:05
    When I saw the VS 2010:Google Chrome compilation showing on the graph as 10 seconds to compile I was getting ready to be really impressed ... until the text said 10 minutes. ;o)
  • 1 Hide
    david801644 , 7 March 2012 15:48
    Yea, but how about the Quake frame rate?
  • 1 Hide
    Dr_M0rph3us , 7 March 2012 19:11
    Great review - it covered almost everything related to real workstation workload. These CPUs offer a big performance increase over the previous XEON line, but I'd also wait to see the retail prices before starting building new architecture solutions using this platform.