Xeon Silver 4309Y vs E5-2648L v4

Aggregate performance score

Xeon E5-2648L v4
2016
14 cores / 28 threads, 75 Watt
7.55
Xeon Silver 4309Y
2021
8 cores / 16 threads, 105 Watt
12.48
+65.3%

Xeon Silver 4309Y outperforms Xeon E5-2648L v4 by an impressive 65% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E5-2648L v4 and Xeon Silver 4309Y processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking974630
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.41no data
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesIntel Xeon E5no data
Power efficiency9.1810.84
Architecture codenameBroadwell (2015−2019)Ice Lake-SP (2021)
Release date20 June 2016 (8 years ago)6 April 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,544no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon E5-2648L v4 and Xeon Silver 4309Y 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 cores14 (Tetradeca-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads2816
Base clock speedno data2.8 GHz
Boost clock speed1.8 GHz3.6 GHz
Bus typeQPIno data
Bus rate2 × 9.6 GT/sno data
Multiplier18no data
L1 cacheno data64K (per core)
L2 cache3.5 MB1 MB (per core)
L3 cache35 MB12 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm10 nm
Die size306.18 mm2no data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data76 °C
Number of transistors4700 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E5-2648L v4 and Xeon Silver 4309Y 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 configuration2 (Multiprocessor)2
Socketno dataFCLGA4189
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt105 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-2648L v4 and Xeon Silver 4309Y. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2.0
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
TSX++
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Xeon E5-2648L v4 and Xeon Silver 4309Y technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDBno data+
SGXno dataYes with Intel® SPS

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-2648L v4 and Xeon Silver 4309Y are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-2648L v4 and Xeon Silver 4309Y. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR4-2667
Maximum memory size1,536 GB6 TB
Max memory channelsno data8
ECC memory support-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-2648L v4 and Xeon Silver 4309Y.

PCIe version3.04.0
PCI Express lanes4064

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 E5-2648L v4 7.55
Xeon Silver 4309Y 12.48
+65.3%

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 E5-2648L v4 11547
Xeon Silver 4309Y 19100
+65.4%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.55 12.48
Recency 20 June 2016 6 April 2021
Physical cores 14 8
Threads 28 16
Chip lithography 14 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 105 Watt

Xeon E5-2648L v4 has 75% more physical cores and 75% more threads, and 40% lower power consumption.

Xeon Silver 4309Y, on the other hand, has a 65.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 40% more advanced lithography process.

The Xeon Silver 4309Y is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E5-2648L v4 in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon E5-2648L v4 is a mobile workstation processor while Xeon Silver 4309Y is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-2648L v4 and Xeon Silver 4309Y, 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 E5-2648L v4
Xeon E5-2648L v4
Intel Xeon Silver 4309Y
Xeon Silver 4309Y

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 E5-2648L v4 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 11 votes

Rate Xeon Silver 4309Y on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon E5-2648L v4 or Xeon Silver 4309Y, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.