E2-9000 vs Xeon E3-1280 v3

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon E3-1280 v3
2013
4 cores / 8 threads, 82 Watt
4.74
+665%
E2-9000
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.62

Xeon E3-1280 v3 outperforms E2-9000 by a whopping 665% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E3-1280 v3 and E2-9000 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking12762784
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.06no data
Market segmentServerLaptop
Seriesno dataBristol Ridge
Power efficiency5.375.76
Architecture codenameHaswell-WS (2013−2014)Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date2 June 2013 (11 years ago)1 June 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$800no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon E3-1280 v3 and E2-9000 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads82
Base clock speed3.6 GHz1.8 GHz
Boost clock speed4 GHz2.2 GHz
Bus rate5 GT/sno data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache256 KB (per core)1 MB
L3 cache8192 KB (shared)no data
Chip lithography22 nm28 nm
Die size160 mm2124.5 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data90 °C
Number of transistors1,400 million1200 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E3-1280 v3 and E2-9000 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 configuration1no data
SocketFCLGA1150BGA
Power consumption (TDP)82 Watt10 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E3-1280 v3 and E2-9000. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2Virtualization,
AES-NI+-
AVX+-
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
TSX+-
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
SIPP+-
Fast Memory Access+no data

Security technologies

Xeon E3-1280 v3 and E2-9000 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data
Secure Key+no data
Identity Protection+-
OS Guard+no data
Anti-Theft+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E3-1280 v3 and E2-9000 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E3-1280 v3 and E2-9000. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR4
Maximum memory size32 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth25.6 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon R2 (Stoney Ridge)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E3-1280 v3 and E2-9000.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes16no 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 E3-1280 v3 4.74
+665%
E2-9000 0.62

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 E3-1280 v3 7393
+665%
E2-9000 967

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.74 0.62
Recency 2 June 2013 1 June 2016
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 8 2
Chip lithography 22 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 82 Watt 10 Watt

Xeon E3-1280 v3 has a 664.5% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 27.3% more advanced lithography process.

E2-9000, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and 720% lower power consumption.

The Xeon E3-1280 v3 is our recommended choice as it beats the E2-9000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon E3-1280 v3 is a server/workstation processor while E2-9000 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E3-1280 v3 and E2-9000, 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 E3-1280 v3
Xeon E3-1280 v3
AMD E2-9000
E2-9000

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.


3.7 42 votes

Rate Xeon E3-1280 v3 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 311 votes

Rate E2-9000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon E3-1280 v3 or E2-9000, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.