Xeon D-1844NT vs E5-1603
Primary details
Comparing Xeon E5-1603 and Xeon D-1844NT processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1833 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Power efficiency | 1.59 | no data |
| Release date | 1 January 2012 (12 years ago) | 1 October 2023 (1 year ago) |
Detailed specifications
Xeon E5-1603 and Xeon D-1844NT 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 10 (Deca-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 20 |
| Base clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 3.1 GHz |
| Bus rate | 0 GT/s | no data |
| L3 cache | 10 MB | 15360 KB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 64 °C | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
| VID voltage range | 0.6V - 1.35V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon E5-1603 and Xeon D-1844NT 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 | 1 | no data |
| Socket | FCLGA2011 | FCBGA2227 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 130 Watt | 55 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-1603 and Xeon D-1844NT. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® AVX | Intel® AVX-512 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| vPro | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| QuickAssist | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | + |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | + |
| Flex Memory Access | + | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | + | no data |
| Deep Learning Boost | - | + |
Security technologies
Xeon E5-1603 and Xeon D-1844NT technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | - |
| EDB | + | + |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® SPS |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-1603 and Xeon D-1844NT are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-1603 and Xeon D-1844NT. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3-800, DDR3-1066 | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | 375 GB | 256 GB |
| Max memory channels | 4 | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 31.4 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-1603 and Xeon D-1844NT.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 40 | 16 |
| USB revision | no data | 3.0 |
| Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports | no data | 24 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 4 |
| Integrated LAN | no data | + |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 January 2012 | 1 October 2023 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 10 |
| Threads | 4 | 20 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 130 Watt | 55 Watt |
Xeon D-1844NT has an age advantage of 11 years, 150% more physical cores and 400% more threads, and 136.4% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Xeon E5-1603 and Xeon D-1844NT. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-1603 and Xeon D-1844NT, 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.
