Xeon Gold 6240R vs E5-2699 v4

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon E5-2699 v4
2016
22 cores / 44 threads, 145 Watt
15.72
Xeon Gold 6240R
2020
24 cores / 48 threads, 165 Watt
21.00
+33.6%

Xeon Gold 6240R outperforms Xeon E5-2699 v4 by a substantial 34% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E5-2699 v4 and Xeon Gold 6240R processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking434264
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.5418.81
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesIntel Xeon E5Intel Xeon Gold
Power efficiency10.2512.04
Architecture codenameBroadwell (2015−2019)Cascade Lake (2019−2020)
Release date20 June 2016 (8 years ago)24 February 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$4,115$2,200

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon Gold 6240R has 641% better value for money than Xeon E5-2699 v4.

Detailed specifications

Xeon E5-2699 v4 and Xeon Gold 6240R 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 cores22 (Docosa-Core)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Threads4448
Base clock speed2.2 GHz2.4 GHz
Boost clock speed3.6 GHz4 GHz
Bus typeQPIDMI 3.0
Bus rate2 × 9.6 GT/s4 × 8 GT/s
Multiplier2224
L1 cacheno data1.5 MB
L2 cache5.5 MB24 MB
L3 cache55 MB35.75 MB
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Die size456.12 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature79 °C90 °C
Number of transistors7200 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E5-2699 v4 and Xeon Gold 6240R 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)no data
SocketFCLGA2011FCLGA3647
Power consumption (TDP)145 Watt165 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-2699 v4 and Xeon Gold 6240R. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVX2Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technology2.02.0
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX++
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access-no data
Demand Based Switching+no data
PAE46 Bitno data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data-
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Xeon E5-2699 v4 and Xeon Gold 6240R technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

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

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-2699 v4 and Xeon Gold 6240R are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-2699 v4 and Xeon Gold 6240R. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133, DDR4-2400DDR4-2933
Maximum memory size1.5 TB1 TB
Max memory channels46
Maximum memory bandwidth76.8 GB/s140.8 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-2699 v4 and Xeon Gold 6240R.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes4048

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 E5-2699 v4 15.72
Xeon Gold 6240R 21.00
+33.6%

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 E5-2699 v4 24976
Xeon Gold 6240R 33353
+33.5%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.72 21.00
Recency 20 June 2016 24 February 2020
Physical cores 22 24
Threads 44 48
Power consumption (TDP) 145 Watt 165 Watt

Xeon E5-2699 v4 has 13.8% lower power consumption.

Xeon Gold 6240R, on the other hand, has a 33.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and 9.1% more physical cores and 9.1% more threads.

The Xeon Gold 6240R is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E5-2699 v4 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-2699 v4 and Xeon Gold 6240R, 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 E5-2699 v4
Xeon E5-2699 v4
Intel Xeon Gold 6240R
Xeon Gold 6240R

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.


4.3 546 votes

Rate Xeon E5-2699 v4 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 11 votes

Rate Xeon Gold 6240R on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon E5-2699 v4 or Xeon Gold 6240R, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.