Ryzen Threadripper 1900 vs Xeon E5-2696 V3
Primary details
Comparing Xeon E5-2696 V3 and Ryzen Threadripper 1900 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 527 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Power efficiency | 9.07 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Haswell-EP (2014−2015) | Zen (2017−2020) |
| Release date | 8 September 2014 (10 years ago) | 31 August 2017 (7 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Xeon E5-2696 V3 and Ryzen Threadripper 1900 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 | 18 (Octadeca-Core) | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Threads | 36 | 16 |
| Base clock speed | 2.3 GHz | 3.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 3.7 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64K (per core) | 96K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 256K (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 45 MB (shared) | 32 MB |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 356 mm2 | 213 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 77 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 2,600 million | 9,600 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon E5-2696 V3 and Ryzen Threadripper 1900 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 | 1 |
| Socket | 2011-3 | SP3r2 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 145 Watt | 125 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-2696 V3 and Ryzen Threadripper 1900. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| TSX | + | - |
Security technologies
Xeon E5-2696 V3 and Ryzen Threadripper 1900 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-2696 V3 and Ryzen Threadripper 1900 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-2696 V3 and Ryzen Threadripper 1900. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3, DDR4 2133 MHz Quad-channel | DDR4 Quad-channel |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-2696 V3 and Ryzen Threadripper 1900.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 40 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 8 September 2014 | 31 August 2017 |
| Physical cores | 18 | 8 |
| Threads | 36 | 16 |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 145 Watt | 125 Watt |
Xeon E5-2696 V3 has 125% more physical cores and 125% more threads.
Ryzen Threadripper 1900, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 57.1% more advanced lithography process, and 16% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Xeon E5-2696 V3 and Ryzen Threadripper 1900. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Xeon E5-2696 V3 is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen Threadripper 1900 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-2696 V3 and Ryzen Threadripper 1900, 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.
