Xeon Platinum 8571N vs E5-2620

Aggregate performance score

Xeon E5-2620
2012
6 cores / 12 threads, 95 Watt
3.43
Xeon Platinum 8571N
2023
52 cores / 104 threads, 300 Watt
44.35
+1193%

Platinum 8571N outperforms E5-2620 by a whopping 1193% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E5-2620 and Xeon Platinum 8571N processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking154550
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.73no data
Market segmentServerServer
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge-EP (2012)Emerald Rapids (2023)
Release date6 March 2012 (12 years ago)14 December 2023 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$36no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon E5-2620 and Xeon Platinum 8571N 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 cores6 (Hexa-Core)52
Threads12104
Base clock speed2 GHz2.4 GHz
Boost clock speed2.5 GHz4 GHz
Bus rate7.2 GT/sno data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)80 KB (per core)
L2 cache256 KB (per core)2 MB (per core)
L3 cache15360 KB (shared)300 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nmIntel 7 nm
Die size435 mm22x 763 mm2
Maximum core temperature77 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data78 °C
Number of transistors2,270 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E5-2620 and Xeon Platinum 8571N 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 configuration21
SocketFCLGA2011FCLGA4677
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt300 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-2620 and Xeon Platinum 8571N. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVXIntel® AMX, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512
AES-NI++
AVX++
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technology1.02.0
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX-+
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access-no data
Demand Based Switching+no data
StatusDiscontinuedLaunched
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Xeon E5-2620 and Xeon Platinum 8571N technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB++
SGXno dataYes with Intel® SPS
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-2620 and Xeon Platinum 8571N are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-2620 and Xeon Platinum 8571N. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR5 @ 4800 MT/s (1 DPC)
Maximum memory size384 GB4 TB
Max memory channels48
Maximum memory bandwidth42.6 GB/sno data
ECC memory support++

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-2620 and Xeon Platinum 8571N.

PCIe version3.05.0
PCI Express lanes4080

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 E5-2620 3.43
Xeon Platinum 8571N 44.35
+1193%

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 E5-2620 5291
Xeon Platinum 8571N 68385
+1192%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.43 44.35
Recency 6 March 2012 14 December 2023
Physical cores 6 52
Threads 12 104
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 300 Watt

Xeon E5-2620 has 215.8% lower power consumption.

Xeon Platinum 8571N, on the other hand, has a 1193% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, and 766.7% more physical cores and 766.7% more threads.

The Xeon Platinum 8571N is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E5-2620 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-2620 and Xeon Platinum 8571N, 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 E5-2620
Xeon E5-2620
Intel Xeon Platinum 8571N
Xeon Platinum 8571N

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.


4 512 votes

Rate Xeon E5-2620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate Xeon Platinum 8571N on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon E5-2620 or Xeon Platinum 8571N, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.