Xeon E3-1505L v6 vs E5-2695 v3

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon E5-2695 v3
2014
14 cores / 28 threads, 120 Watt
10.97
+176%

Xeon E5-2695 v3 outperforms Xeon E3-1505L v6 by a whopping 176% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E5-2695 v3 and Xeon E3-1505L v6 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking7291454
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data1.76
Market segmentServerServer
Seriesno dataIntel Xeon E3
Power efficiency8.3414.52
Architecture codenameHaswell-EP (2014−2015)Kaby Lake (2016−2019)
Release date8 September 2014 (10 years ago)3 January 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$433

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon E5-2695 v3 and Xeon E3-1505L v6 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads288
Base clock speed2.3 GHzno data
Boost clock speed3.3 GHz2.2 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 3.0
Bus rate9.6 GT/s8 GT/s
Multiplierno data22
L1 cache64K (per core)256 KB
L2 cache256K (per core)1 MB
L3 cache35 MB (shared)8 MB
Chip lithography22 nm14 nm
Die size356 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature83 °Cno data
Number of transistors2,600 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E5-2695 v3 and Xeon E3-1505L v6 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 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFCLGA2011no data
Power consumption (TDP)120 Watt25 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-2695 v3 and Xeon E3-1505L v6. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVX2no data
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
TSX-+
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access-no data
Demand Based Switching+no data
PAE46 Bitno data

Security technologies

Xeon E5-2695 v3 and Xeon E3-1505L v6 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB+no data
Secure Key+no data
OS Guard+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-2695 v3 and Xeon E3-1505L v6 are enumerated here.

VT-d++
VT-x++
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-2695 v3 and Xeon E3-1505L v6. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133DDR3L-1600
Maximum memory size768 GB64 GB
Max memory channels42
Maximum memory bandwidth68 GB/s34.134 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel HD Graphics P630

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-2695 v3 and Xeon E3-1505L v6.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes4016

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 E5-2695 v3 10.97
+176%
Xeon E3-1505L v6 3.98

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 E5-2695 v3 16790
+176%
Xeon E3-1505L v6 6088

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.97 3.98
Recency 8 September 2014 3 January 2017
Physical cores 14 4
Threads 28 8
Chip lithography 22 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 120 Watt 25 Watt

Xeon E5-2695 v3 has a 175.6% higher aggregate performance score, and 250% more physical cores and 250% more threads.

Xeon E3-1505L v6, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 57.1% more advanced lithography process, and 380% lower power consumption.

The Xeon E5-2695 v3 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E3-1505L v6 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-2695 v3 and Xeon E3-1505L v6, 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 E5-2695 v3
Xeon E5-2695 v3
Intel Xeon E3-1505L v6
Xeon E3-1505L v6

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.


4.2 105 votes

Rate Xeon E5-2695 v3 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Xeon E3-1505L v6 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon E5-2695 v3 or Xeon E3-1505L v6, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.