Xeon Gold 6312U vs 2.66
Aggregate performance score
Xeon Gold 6312U outperforms Xeon 2.66 by a whopping 9722% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Xeon 2.66 and Xeon Gold 6312U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3122 | 181 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Power efficiency | 0.29 | 13.57 |
| Architecture codename | Prestonia (2002) | Ice Lake-SP (2021) |
| Release date | November 2002 (22 years ago) | 6 April 2021 (3 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Xeon 2.66 and Xeon Gold 6312U 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 | 1 (Single-Core) | 24 (Tetracosa-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 48 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.66 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| L1 cache | 16 KB | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 36 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 10 nm |
| Die size | 217 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 80 °C |
| Number of transistors | 55 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon 2.66 and Xeon Gold 6312U 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 | 2 | 1 |
| Socket | 604 | FCLGA4189 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 89 Watt | 185 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon 2.66 and Xeon Gold 6312U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512 |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| TSX | - | + |
| Deep Learning Boost | - | + |
Security technologies
Xeon 2.66 and Xeon Gold 6312U technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® SPS |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon 2.66 and Xeon Gold 6312U 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 Xeon 2.66 and Xeon Gold 6312U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4-3200 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 6 TB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 8 |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon 2.66 and Xeon Gold 6312U.
| PCIe version | no data | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 64 |
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 | 0.27 | 26.52 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 24 |
| Threads | 1 | 48 |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 89 Watt | 185 Watt |
Xeon 2.66 has 107.9% lower power consumption.
Xeon Gold 6312U, on the other hand, has a 9722.2% higher aggregate performance score, 2300% more physical cores and 4700% more threads, and a 1200% more advanced lithography process.
The Xeon Gold 6312U is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon 2.66 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon 2.66 and Xeon Gold 6312U, 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.
