Xeon E5-2609 vs E5630

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon E5630
2010
4 cores / 8 threads, 80 Watt
2.39
+32.8%
Xeon E5-2609
2012
4 cores / 4 threads, 80 Watt
1.80

Xeon E5630 outperforms Xeon E5-2609 by a substantial 33% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E5630 and Xeon E5-2609 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking17872018
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.160.86
Market segmentServerServer
Power efficiency2.812.12
Architecture codenameWestmere-EP (2010−2011)Sandy Bridge-EP (2012)
Release date16 March 2010 (14 years ago)6 March 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$73$143

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon E5630 has 35% better value for money than Xeon E5-2609.

Detailed specifications

Xeon E5630 and Xeon E5-2609 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads84
Base clock speed2.53 GHz2.4 GHz
Boost clock speed2.8 GHz2.4 GHz
Bus rateno data6.4 GT/s
L1 cache64 KB (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache256 KB (per core)256 KB (per core)
L3 cache12 MB (shared)10240 KB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm32 nm
Die size239 mm2294 mm2
Maximum core temperature78 °C70 °C
Number of transistors1,170 million1,270 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E5630 and Xeon E5-2609 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 configuration22
SocketFCLGA1366,LGA1366FCLGA2011
Power consumption (TDP)80 Watt80 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5630 and Xeon E5-2609. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2Intel® AVX
AES-NI++
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology1.0-
Hyper-Threading Technology+-
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data-
Demand Based Switching++
PAE40 Bitno data

Security technologies

Xeon E5630 and Xeon E5-2609 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5630 and Xeon E5-2609 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5630 and Xeon E5-2609. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size288 GB384 GB
Max memory channels34
Maximum memory bandwidth25.6 GB/s34.1 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5630 and Xeon E5-2609.

PCIe version2.03.0
PCI Express lanesno data40

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 E5630 2.39
+32.8%
Xeon E5-2609 1.80

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 E5630 3790
+32.6%
Xeon E5-2609 2858

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.

Xeon E5630 448
+9.5%
Xeon E5-2609 409

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.

Xeon E5630 1955
+52.4%
Xeon E5-2609 1283

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.39 1.80
Recency 16 March 2010 6 March 2012
Threads 8 4

Xeon E5630 has a 32.8% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more threads.

Xeon E5-2609, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year.

The Xeon E5630 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E5-2609 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5630 and Xeon E5-2609, 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 E5630
Xeon E5630
Intel Xeon E5-2609
Xeon E5-2609

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.


3.9 15 votes

Rate Xeon E5630 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 12 votes

Rate Xeon E5-2609 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon E5630 or Xeon E5-2609, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.