Xeon E5-2603 v2 vs Silver 4208

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon Silver 4208
2019
8 cores / 16 threads, 85 Watt
7.08
+312%
Xeon E5-2603 v2
2013
4 cores / 4 threads, 80 Watt
1.72

Xeon Silver 4208 outperforms Xeon E5-2603 v2 by a whopping 312% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon Silver 4208 and Xeon E5-2603 v2 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking9912033
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation18.490.38
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesIntel Xeon Silverno data
Power efficiency7.882.03
Architecture codenameCascade Lake (2019−2020)Ivy Bridge-EP (2013)
Release date2 April 2019 (5 years ago)1 September 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$417$240

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon Silver 4208 has 4766% better value for money than Xeon E5-2603 v2.

Detailed specifications

Xeon Silver 4208 and Xeon E5-2603 v2 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads164
Base clock speed2.1 GHz1.8 GHz
Boost clock speed3.2 GHz1.8 GHz
Bus rateno data6.4 GT/s
Multiplier21no data
L1 cache512 KB64 KB (per core)
L2 cache8 MB256 KB (per core)
L3 cache11 MB10 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm22 nm
Die sizeno data160 mm2
Maximum core temperature78 °C71 °C
Number of transistorsno data1,400 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+-

Compatibility

Information on Xeon Silver 4208 and Xeon E5-2603 v2 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)2
SocketFCLGA3647FCLGA2011
Power consumption (TDP)85 Watt80 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon Silver 4208 and Xeon E5-2603 v2. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512Intel® AVX
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shift+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0-
Hyper-Threading Technology+-
TSX+-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data-
Demand Based Switchingno data+
PAEno data46 Bit
Turbo Boost Max 3.0-no data
Deep Learning Boost+-

Security technologies

Xeon Silver 4208 and Xeon E5-2603 v2 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB++
Secure Keyno data+
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon Silver 4208 and Xeon E5-2603 v2 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon Silver 4208 and Xeon E5-2603 v2. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2400DDR3
Maximum memory size1 TB768 GB
Max memory channels64
Maximum memory bandwidth115.212 GB/s42.6 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon Silver 4208 and Xeon E5-2603 v2.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes4840

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 Silver 4208 7.08
+312%
Xeon E5-2603 v2 1.72

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 Silver 4208 11247
+311%
Xeon E5-2603 v2 2735

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.08 1.72
Recency 2 April 2019 1 September 2013
Physical cores 8 4
Threads 16 4
Chip lithography 14 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 85 Watt 80 Watt

Xeon Silver 4208 has a 311.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 57.1% more advanced lithography process.

Xeon E5-2603 v2, on the other hand, has 6.3% lower power consumption.

The Xeon Silver 4208 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E5-2603 v2 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon Silver 4208 and Xeon E5-2603 v2, 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 Silver 4208
Xeon Silver 4208
Intel Xeon E5-2603 v2
Xeon E5-2603 v2

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.


3.4 38 votes

Rate Xeon Silver 4208 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
1.4 5 votes

Rate Xeon E5-2603 v2 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon Silver 4208 or Xeon E5-2603 v2, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.