Xeon E5-2699A v4 vs E5-4669 v4

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon E5-4669 v4
2016
22 cores / 44 threads, 135 Watt
7.25
Xeon E5-2699A v4
2016
22 cores / 44 threads, 145 Watt
16.45
+127%

Xeon E5-2699A v4 outperforms Xeon E5-4669 v4 by a whopping 127% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E5-4669 v4 and Xeon E5-2699A v4 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking992404
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.312.32
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesIntel Xeon E5Intel Xeon E5
Power efficiency5.0810.73
Architecture codenameBroadwell (2015−2019)Broadwell-EP (2016)
Release date20 June 2016 (8 years ago)25 October 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$7,007$4,938

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon E5-2699A v4 has 648% better value for money than Xeon E5-4669 v4.

Detailed specifications

Xeon E5-4669 v4 and Xeon E5-2699A v4 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)22 (Docosa-Core)
Threads4444
Base clock speed2.2 GHz2.4 GHz
Boost clock speed3 GHz3.6 GHz
Bus typeQPIQPI
Bus rate2 × 9.6 GT/s2 × 9.6 GT/s
Multiplier2224
L1 cacheno data64 KB (per core)
L2 cache5.5 MB256 KB (per core)
L3 cache55 MB55 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Die size456.12 mm2456.12 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data70 °C
Number of transistors7200 Million7,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E5-4669 v4 and Xeon E5-2699A v4 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 configuration4 (Multiprocessor)2 (Multiprocessor)
SocketFCLGA2011FCLGA2011
Power consumption (TDP)135 Watt145 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-4669 v4 and Xeon E5-2699A v4. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVX2Intel® AVX2
AES-NI++
AVX++
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology2.02.0
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX++
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Flex Memory Access--
Demand Based Switchingno data+
PAE46 Bit46 Bit

Security technologies

Xeon E5-4669 v4 and Xeon E5-2699A v4 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB++
Secure Key++
OS Guard++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-4669 v4 and Xeon E5-2699A v4 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-4669 v4 and Xeon E5-2699A v4. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133, DDR4-2400
Maximum memory size1.5 TB1.5 TB
Max memory channels44
Maximum memory bandwidth68 GB/s76.8 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-4669 v4 and Xeon E5-2699A v4.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes4040

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 E5-4669 v4 7.25
Xeon E5-2699A v4 16.45
+127%

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 E5-4669 v4 11523
Xeon E5-2699A v4 26129
+127%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.25 16.45
Recency 20 June 2016 25 October 2016
Power consumption (TDP) 135 Watt 145 Watt

Xeon E5-4669 v4 has 7.4% lower power consumption.

Xeon E5-2699A v4, on the other hand, has a 126.9% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 4 months.

The Xeon E5-2699A v4 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E5-4669 v4 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-4669 v4 and Xeon E5-2699A v4, 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 E5-4669 v4
Xeon E5-4669 v4
Intel Xeon E5-2699A v4
Xeon E5-2699A v4

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.


2.5 11 votes

Rate Xeon E5-4669 v4 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 53 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon E5-4669 v4 or Xeon E5-2699A v4, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.