Xeon E-2236 vs Apple M1 Pro
Aggregate performance score
Apple M1 Pro outperforms Xeon E-2236 by a significant 23% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing M1 Pro and Xeon E-2236 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 721 | 870 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 36.93 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | Apple M-Series | Intel Xeon E |
| Power efficiency | no data | 10.39 |
| Architecture codename | no data | Coffee Lake-S WS (2018−2019) |
| Release date | 18 October 2021 (3 years ago) | 27 May 2019 (5 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $284 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
M1 Pro and Xeon E-2236 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 cores | 10 (Deca-Core) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 10 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | 2.064 GHz | 3.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.22 GHz | 4.8 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 3.0 |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 34 |
| L1 cache | 2.9 MB | 384 KB |
| L2 cache | 28 MB | 1.5 MB |
| L3 cache | 24 MB | 12 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | no data | 149.6 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 33700 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | + |
Compatibility
Information on M1 Pro and Xeon E-2236 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 configuration | no data | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | no data | FCLGA1151 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 80 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by M1 Pro and Xeon E-2236. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| TSX | - | + |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
Security technologies
M1 Pro and Xeon E-2236 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| MPX | - | + |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® ME |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by M1 Pro and Xeon E-2236 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 M1 Pro and Xeon E-2236. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4-2666 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 128 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 42.671 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Apple M1 Pro 16-Core GPU | Intel UHD Graphics P630 |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by M1 Pro and Xeon E-2236 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | no data | N/A |
| Max resolution over eDP | no data | N/A |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | no data | N/A |
| Max resolution over VGA | no data | N/A |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by M1 Pro and Xeon E-2236 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | N/A |
| OpenGL | no data | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by M1 Pro and Xeon E-2236.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 16 |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 10.83 | 8.78 |
| Recency | 18 October 2021 | 27 May 2019 |
| Physical cores | 10 | 6 |
| Threads | 10 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 14 nm |
Apple M1 Pro has a 23.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, 66.7% more physical cores, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.
Xeon E-2236, on the other hand, has 20% more threads.
The M1 Pro is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E-2236 in performance tests.
Be aware that Apple M1 Pro is a notebook processor while Xeon E-2236 is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Apple M1 Pro and Xeon E-2236, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
