Xeon W-3275M vs X5698

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon X5698
2011
2 cores / 4 threads, 130 Watt
2.25
Xeon W-3275M
2019
28 cores / 56 threads, 205 Watt
26.03
+1057%

Xeon W-3275M outperforms Xeon X5698 by a whopping 1057% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon X5698 and Xeon W-3275M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1839195
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data4.96
Market segmentServerServer
Seriesno dataIntel Xeon W
Power efficiency1.5811.58
Architecture codenameWestmere-EP (2010−2011)Cascade Lake (2019−2020)
Release date14 February 2011 (13 years ago)3 June 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$7,453

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon X5698 and Xeon W-3275M 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 cores2 (Dual-core)28 (Octacosa-Core)
Threads456
Base clock speed4.4 GHz2.5 GHz
Boost clock speed4.4 GHz4.6 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 3.0
Bus rateno data4 × 8 GT/s
Multiplierno data25
L1 cache64 KB (per core)1.75 MB
L2 cache256 KB (per core)28 MB
L3 cache12288 KB (shared)38.5 MB
Chip lithography32 nm14 nm
Die size239 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data76 °C
Number of transistors1,170 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Xeon X5698 and Xeon W-3275M 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 configuration21 (Uniprocessor)
Socket1366FCLGA3647
Power consumption (TDP)130 Watt205 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon X5698 and Xeon W-3275M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® AVX-512
AES-NI++
AVX-+
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2.0
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX-+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data+
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Xeon X5698 and Xeon W-3275M technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon X5698 and Xeon W-3275M are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-x++
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon X5698 and Xeon W-3275M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4-2933
Maximum memory sizeno data2 TB
Max memory channelsno data6
Maximum memory bandwidthno data140.8 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon X5698 and Xeon W-3275M.

PCIe version2.03.0
PCI Express lanesno data64

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 X5698 2.25
Xeon W-3275M 26.03
+1057%

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 X5698 3447
Xeon W-3275M 39834
+1056%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.25 26.03
Recency 14 February 2011 3 June 2019
Physical cores 2 28
Threads 4 56
Chip lithography 32 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 130 Watt 205 Watt

Xeon X5698 has 57.7% lower power consumption.

Xeon W-3275M, on the other hand, has a 1056.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, 1300% more physical cores and 1300% more threads, and a 128.6% more advanced lithography process.

The Xeon W-3275M is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon X5698 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon X5698 and Xeon W-3275M, 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 X5698
Xeon X5698
Intel Xeon W-3275M
Xeon W-3275M

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.


3.1 7 votes

Rate Xeon X5698 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 63 votes

Rate Xeon W-3275M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon X5698 or Xeon W-3275M, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.