Xeon E3-1505M v5 vs E5-2690 v4
Aggregate performance score
E5-2690 v4 outperforms E3-1505M v5 by a whopping 183% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Xeon E5-2690 v4 and Xeon E3-1505M v5 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 576 | 1282 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 11.90 | 0.27 |
| Market segment | Server | Mobile workstation |
| Series | Intel Xeon E5 | Intel Xeon E3 |
| Architecture codename | Broadwell (2015−2019) | Skylake (2015−2016) |
| Release date | 20 June 2016 (8 years ago) | 1 September 2015 (8 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $2,090 | $434 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Xeon E5-2690 v4 has 4307% better value for money than Xeon E3-1505M v5.
Detailed specifications
Xeon E5-2690 v4 and Xeon E3-1505M v5 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 | 14 (Tetradeca-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 28 | 8 |
| Boost clock speed | 2.6 GHz | 2.8 GHz |
| Bus support | 2 × 9.6 GT/s | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| L1 cache | no data | 256 KB |
| L2 cache | 3.5 MB | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | 35 MB | 8 MB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 306.18 mm2 | 122 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 89 °C | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 4700 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon E5-2690 v4 and Xeon E3-1505M v5 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 | 2 (Multiprocessor) | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | no data | BGA |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 135 Watt | 45 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-2690 v4 and Xeon E3-1505M v5. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| TSX | + | + |
| SIPP | no data | + |
Security technologies
Xeon E5-2690 v4 and Xeon E3-1505M v5 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-2690 v4 and Xeon E3-1505M v5 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | no data | + |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-2690 v4 and Xeon E3-1505M v5. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR3, DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | 1,536 GB | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | 34.134 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | + | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel HD Graphics P530 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-2690 v4 and Xeon E3-1505M v5.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 40 | 16 |
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.
E5-2690 v4 outperforms E3-1505M v5 by 183% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
E5-2690 v4 outperforms E3-1505M v5 by 183% in Passmark.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 41%
E3-1505M v5 outperforms E5-2690 v4 by 11% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 41%
E5-2690 v4 outperforms E3-1505M v5 by 111% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 12.66 | 4.48 |
| Recency | 20 June 2016 | 1 September 2015 |
| Physical cores | 14 | 4 |
| Threads | 28 | 8 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 135 Watt | 45 Watt |
Xeon E5-2690 v4 has a 182.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 months, and 250% more physical cores and 250% more threads.
Xeon E3-1505M v5, on the other hand, has 200% lower power consumption.
The Xeon E5-2690 v4 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E3-1505M v5 in performance tests.
Be aware that Xeon E5-2690 v4 is a server/workstation processor while Xeon E3-1505M v5 is a mobile workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-2690 v4 and Xeon E3-1505M v5, 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.
