Xeon E5-2660 v3 vs D-1567

Aggregate performance score

Xeon D-1567
2016
12 cores / 24 threads, 65 Watt
6.70
Xeon E5-2660 v3
2014
10 cores / 20 threads, 105 Watt
8.42
+25.7%

Xeon E5-2660 v3 outperforms Xeon D-1567 by a significant 26% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon D-1567 and Xeon E5-2660 v3 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1034907
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.64no data
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesIntel Xeon Dno data
Power efficiency9.577.45
Architecture codenameBroadwell (2015−2019)Haswell-EP (2014−2015)
Release date24 February 2016 (8 years ago)8 September 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,069no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon D-1567 and Xeon E5-2660 v3 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 cores12 (Dodeca-Core)10 (Deca-Core)
Threads2420
Base clock speed2.1 GHz2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed2.7 GHz3.3 GHz
Bus typeDMI 2.0no data
Bus rateno data9.6 GT/s
Multiplier21no data
L1 cache768 KB64K (per core)
L2 cache3 MB256K (per core)
L3 cache18 MB25 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm22 nm
Die size306.18 mm2356 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data79 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)80 °Cno data
Number of transistors4700 Million2,600 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Xeon D-1567 and Xeon E5-2660 v3 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)2
SocketFCBGA1667FCLGA2011
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt105 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon D-1567 and Xeon E5-2660 v3. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVX2Intel® AVX2
AES-NI++
AVX++
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology2.02.0
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX+-
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Flex Memory Accessno data-
Demand Based Switchingno data+
PAEno data46 Bit
GPIO+no data

Security technologies

Xeon D-1567 and Xeon E5-2660 v3 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB++
Secure Key++
OS Guard++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon D-1567 and Xeon E5-2660 v3 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon D-1567 and Xeon E5-2660 v3. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4, DDR3DDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133
Maximum memory size128 GB768 GB
Max memory channels24
Maximum memory bandwidth34.124 GB/s68 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon D-1567 and Xeon E5-2660 v3.

PCIe version2.0/3.03.0
PCI Express lanes2440
USB revision2.0/3.0no data
Total number of SATA ports6no data
Number of USB ports8no data
Integrated LAN+no data
UART+no data

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 D-1567 6.70
Xeon E5-2660 v3 8.42
+25.7%

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 D-1567 10447
Xeon E5-2660 v3 13120
+25.6%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.70 8.42
Recency 24 February 2016 8 September 2014
Physical cores 12 10
Threads 24 20
Chip lithography 14 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 105 Watt

Xeon D-1567 has an age advantage of 1 year, 20% more physical cores and 20% more threads, a 57.1% more advanced lithography process, and 61.5% lower power consumption.

Xeon E5-2660 v3, on the other hand, has a 25.7% higher aggregate performance score.

The Xeon E5-2660 v3 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon D-1567 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon D-1567 and Xeon E5-2660 v3, 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 D-1567
Xeon D-1567
Intel Xeon E5-2660 v3
Xeon E5-2660 v3

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Xeon D-1567 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 1683 votes

Rate Xeon E5-2660 v3 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon D-1567 or Xeon E5-2660 v3, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.