Xeon E5-2430 vs E5-2630

Aggregate performance score

Xeon E5-2630
2012
6 cores / 12 threads, 95 Watt
3.89
+12.4%
Xeon E5-2430
2012
6 cores / 12 threads, 95 Watt
3.46

Xeon E5-2630 outperforms Xeon E5-2430 by a moderate 12% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E5-2630 and Xeon E5-2430 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking14441542
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.394.06
Market segmentServerServer
Power efficiency3.883.45
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge-EP (2012)Sandy Bridge-EN (2012)
Release date6 March 2012 (12 years ago)14 May 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$74$119

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon E5-2430 has 20% better value for money than Xeon E5-2630.

Detailed specifications

Xeon E5-2630 and Xeon E5-2430 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)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads1212
Base clock speed2.3 GHz2.2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.8 GHz2.7 GHz
Bus rate7.2 GT/s7.2 GT/s
L1 cache64 KB (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache256 KB (per core)256 KB (per core)
L3 cache15360 KB (shared)15360 KB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm32 nm
Die size435 mm2294 mm2
Maximum core temperature77 °Cno data
Number of transistors2,270 million1,270 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E5-2630 and Xeon E5-2430 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 configuration22
SocketFCLGA2011FCLGA1356
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-2630 and Xeon E5-2430. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVXIntel® AVX
AES-NI++
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology1.01.0
Hyper-Threading Technology++
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Flex Memory Access--
Demand Based Switching++

Security technologies

Xeon E5-2630 and Xeon E5-2430 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-2630 and Xeon E5-2430 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-2630 and Xeon E5-2430. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size384 GB384 GB
Max memory channels43
Maximum memory bandwidth42.6 GB/s32 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-2630 and Xeon E5-2430.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes4024

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 E5-2630 3.89
+12.4%
Xeon E5-2430 3.46

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 E5-2630 6183
+12.6%
Xeon E5-2430 5492

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Xeon E5-2630 453
+16.2%
Xeon E5-2430 390

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Xeon E5-2630 2457
+39.1%
Xeon E5-2430 1766

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.89 3.46
Recency 6 March 2012 14 May 2012

Xeon E5-2630 has a 12.4% higher aggregate performance score.

Xeon E5-2430, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 months.

The Xeon E5-2630 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E5-2430 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-2630 and Xeon E5-2430, 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 E5-2630
Xeon E5-2630
Intel Xeon E5-2430
Xeon E5-2430

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.


4 110 votes

Rate Xeon E5-2630 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 69 votes

Rate Xeon E5-2430 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon E5-2630 or Xeon E5-2430, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.