Intel Xeon E5 Version 3: Up to 18 Haswell EP Cores
by Johan De Gelas on September 8, 2014 12:30 PM ESTSKUs and Pricing
Before we start with the benchmarks, let's first see what you get for your money. To reduce the clutter, we have not listed all of the SKUs but have tried to include useful points of comparison. Also note that we are not comparing pricing or performance with AMD at this point, as AMD has not updated its server CPU offerings for almost 2 years. The Steamroller architecture was very promising and addressed many of the bottlenecks we discovered in the earlier Opteron 6200, but unfortunately it was never made into a high end server CPU. So basically, Intel's only competition right now is the previous generation Xeons, which means Intel has to convince server buyers that upgrading to the latest Xeon pays off.
| Intel Xeon E5 v2 versus v3 2-socket SKU Comparison | |||||||||
| Xeon E5 | Cores/ Threads |
TDP | Clock Speed (GHz) |
Price | Xeon E5 | Cores/ Threads |
TDP | Clock Speed (GHz) |
Price |
| High Performance (20 – 30MB LLC) | High Performance (35-45MB LLC) | ||||||||
| 2699 v3 | 18/36 | 145W | 2.3-3.6 | $4115 | |||||
| 2698 v3 | 16/32 | 135W | 2.3-3.6 | $3226 | |||||
| 2697 v2 | 12/24 | 130W | 2.7-3.5 | $2614 | 2697 v3 | 14/28 | 145W | 2.6-3.6 | $2702 |
| 2695 v2 | 12/24 | 115W | 2.4-3.2 | $2336 | 2695 v3 | 14/28 | 120W | 2.3-3.3 | $2424 |
| "Advanced" (20-30MB LLC) | |||||||||
| 2690 v2 | 10/20 | 130W | 3-3.6 | $2057 | 2690 v3 | 12/24 | 135W | 2.6-3.5 | $2090 |
| 2680 v2 | 10/20 | 115W | 2.8-3.6 | $1723 | 2680 v3 | 12/24 | 120W | 2.5-3.3 | $1745 |
| 2660 v2 | 10/20 | 115W | 2.2-3.0 | $1389 | 2660 v3 | 10/20 | 105W | 2.6-3.3 | $1445 |
| 2650 v2 | 8/16 | 95W | 2.6-3.4 | $1166 | 2650 v3 | 10/20 | 105W | 2.3-3.0 | $1167 |
| Midrange (10 – 20MB LLC) | Midrange (15-25MB LLC) | ||||||||
| 2640 v2 | 8/16 | 95W | 2.0-2.5 | $885 | 2640 v3 | 8/16 | 90W | 2.6-3.4 | $939 |
| 2630 v2 | 6/12 | 80W | 2.6-3.1 | $612 | 2630 v3 | 8/16 | 85W | 2.4-3.2 | $667 |
| Frequency optimized (15 – 25MB LLC) | Frequency optimized (10-20MB LLC) | ||||||||
| 2687W v2 | 8/16 | 150W | 3.4-4.0 | $2108 | 2687W v3 | 10/20 | 160W | 3.1-3.5 | $2141 |
| 2667 v2 | 8/16 | 130W | 3.3-4.0 | $2057 | 2667 v3 | 8/16 | 135W | 3.2-3.6 | $2057 |
| 2643 v2 | 6/12 | 130W | 3.5-3.8 | $1552 | 2643 v3 | 6/12 | 135W | 3.4-3.7 | $1552 |
| 2637 v2 | 4/12 | 130W | 3.5-3.8 | $996 | 2637 v3 | 4/8 | 135W | 3.5-3.7 | $996 |
| Budget (15MB LLC) | Budget (15MB LLC) | ||||||||
| 2609 v2 | 4/4 | 80W | 2.5 | $294 | 2609 v3 | 6/6 | 85W | 1.9 | $306 |
| 2603 v2 | 4/4 | 80W | 1.8 | $202 | 2603 v3 | 6/6 | 85W | 1.6 | $213 |
| Power Optimized (15 – 25MB LLC) | Power Optimized (20-30MB LLC) | ||||||||
| 2650L v2 | 10/20 | 70W | 1.7-2.1 | $1219 | 2650L v3 | 12/24 | 65W | 1.8-2.5 | $1329 |
| 2630L v2 | 6/12 | 70W | 2.4-2.8 | $612 | 2630L v3 | 8/16 | 55W | 1.8-2.9 | $612 |
At the top of the product stack is the new E5-2699 v3, and it's priced accordingly: over $4000 for the most cores Intel has ever put in a Xeon processor. TDP has also gone up compared to the previous generation's top SKU, but for six additional cores that's probably reasonable.
At first glance, the 2695 v3 looks interesting for the performance hungry as it the cheapest "HCC" (High Core Count) option. You get the largest die with the two memory controllers, 35MB LLC, two rings, and TDP is limited to 120W. Of course the question is how well Turbo Boost will compensate for the relatively low base clock.
For those looking for a good balance between price/performance and power, the 2650L v3 offers a 100MHz higher clock, much higher Turbo Boost, two extra cores, and a slightly lower TDP for about $100 more. This SKU looks very tempting for people who do not need the ultimate in processing power, e.g. those looking for a host for their VMs.
Lastly, there is the 2667 v3 which has a high base clock (3.2) and a still reasonable TDP of 135W for all applications that need processing power but do not scale beyond a certain core count.
Those are the SKUs that we have included in this review, so let's see how they fare.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
85 Comments
View All Comments
cmikeh2 - Monday, September 8, 2014 - link
In the SKU comparison table you have the E5-2690V2 listed as a 12/24 part when it is in fact a 10/20 part. Just a tiny quibble. Overall a fantastic read.KAlmquist - Monday, September 8, 2014 - link
Also, the 2637 v2 is 4/8, not 6/12.isa - Monday, September 8, 2014 - link
Looking forward to a new supercomputer record using these behemoths.Bruce Allen - Monday, September 8, 2014 - link
Awesome article. I'd love to see Cinebench and other applications tests. We do a lot of rendering (currently with older dual Xeons) and would love to compare these new Xeons versus the new 5960X chips - software license costs per computer are so high that the 5960X setups will need much higher price/performance to be worth it. We actually use Cinema 4D in production so those scores are relevant. We use V-Ray, Mental Ray and Arnold for Maya too but in general those track with the Cinebench scores so they are a decent guide. Thank you!Ian Cutress - Monday, September 8, 2014 - link
I've got some E5 v3 Xeons in for a more workstation oriented review. Look out for that soon :)fastgeek - Monday, September 8, 2014 - link
From my notes a while back... two E5-2690 v3's (all cores + turbo enabled) under 2012 Server yielded 3,129 for multithreaded and 79 for single.While not Haswell, I can tell you that four E5-4657L V2's returned 4,722 / 94 respectively.
Hope that helps somewhat. :-)
fastgeek - Monday, September 8, 2014 - link
I don't see a way to edit my previous comment; but those scores were from Cinebench R15wireframed - Saturday, September 20, 2014 - link
You pay for licenses for render Nodes? Switch to 3DS, and you get 9999 nodes for free (unless they changed the licensing since I last checked). :)Lone Ranger - Monday, September 8, 2014 - link
You make mention that the large core count chips are pretty good about raising their clock rate when only a few cores are active. Under Linux, what is the best way to see actual turbo frequencies? cpuinfo doesn't show live/actual clock rate.JohanAnandtech - Monday, September 8, 2014 - link
The best way to do this is using Intel's PCM. However, this does not work right now (only on Sandy and Ivy, not Haswel) . I deduced it from the fact that performance was almost identical and previous profiling of some of our benchmarks.