Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3 vs Intel Xeon E5-2643 v3 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E5-2643 v3 and the Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3 are both Haswell-EP server processors on the Intel Socket 2011-3 platform, but they are configured very differently. The 2643 v3 is a high-clock, 6-core part, while the 2630 v3 is a lower-clock, 8-core part. Benchmark data shows the 2643 v3 wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, yet the average benchmark score for the 2643 v3 is 2511, only 0.2% higher than the 2630 v3’s 2507. This makes for a nuanced comparison: the 2643 v3 edges out in every single test, but the margins are so slim that the two chips are effectively peers in aggregate performance, with the 2630 v3 offering two additional cores for workloads that scale beyond what Cinebench measures.

Where Each One Wins

The head-to-head benchmark table is decisive on paper: the Intel Xeon E5-2643 v3 wins all six tests, with a 0.2% delta in five of them and a 0% delta in one. The 2643 v3 takes the Cinebench R15 multicore test with 875 points against 873 for the 2630 v3, and it repeats that 0.2% margin in Cinebench R20 multicore (3646 vs 3640) and Cinebench R23 multicore (8682 vs 8668). Single-core results are nearly identical, with the 2643 v3 scoring 123 in R15 (a 0% delta), 514 in R20, and 1225 in R23, each a 0.2% advantage over the 2630 v3’s 123, 513, and 1223.

However, the use-case split is not about which chip wins each benchmark, but about what those margins imply for real workloads. The 2643 v3’s higher base clock of 3.40 GHz and boost clock of 3.70 GHz, compared to the 2630 v3’s 2.40 GHz base and 3.20 GHz boost, give it a clear advantage for lightly threaded tasks. The single-core scores, while only marginally higher, point to the 2643 v3 being the better choice for latency-sensitive applications where each thread’s speed matters more than total thread count. Conversely, the 2630 v3 has 8 cores and 16 threads versus the 2643 v3’s 6 cores and 12 threads. For workloads that scale well with core count—such as heavily parallel rendering, virtualization, or database processing—the 2630 v3’s two extra physical cores provide headroom that the Cinebench tests do not fully capture, given that the 2643 v3 still wins those tests.

The data shows that the 2643 v3 is the winner in every measured scenario, but the 2630 v3 is not a loser. The 2630 v3’s average benchmark score of 2507 places it within 0.2% of the 2643 v3’s 2511, and its nearest rival list includes the 2643 v3 with a deltaPct of -0.2%, meaning the two are statistically indistinguishable in aggregate. The 2643 v3 wins on raw speed, while the 2630 v3 wins on core count and efficiency, as evidenced by its 85 W TDP against the 2643 v3’s 135 W TDP.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on the same Haswell-EP architecture, codenamed Haswell-EP, using Intel’s 22 nm process node. They share the same foundry, transistor count of 2,600 million, and die size of 356 mm². The cache hierarchy is identical: 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is also the same, with DDR4, quad-channel memory bus, and ECC memory support. Both use PCIe Gen 3 with 40 lanes (CPU only), and neither has integrated graphics.

The critical architectural divergence is in core configuration and clock speeds. The 2643 v3 packs 6 cores and 12 threads, running at a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.70 GHz. The 2630 v3 offers 8 cores and 16 threads, but at a lower base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.20 GHz. This means the 2643 v3 has a 1.0 GHz higher base clock and a 0.5 GHz higher boost clock, which directly explains its single-core benchmark wins. The 2630 v3 compensates with two additional cores, which is why the multicore margins are so narrow—the extra parallelism offsets the clock disadvantage in the Cinebench tests.

Memory bandwidth is another differentiator, though not part of the cache hierarchy. The 2643 v3 supports 68.3 GB/s of memory bandwidth, while the 2630 v3 supports 59.7 GB/s. This 8.6 GB/s difference aligns with the 2643 v3’s higher clock speeds, as it can feed data to its cores faster. The TDP also differs significantly: the 2643 v3 draws 135 W, while the 2630 v3 draws 85 W, making the 2630 v3 a more power-efficient option for dense server deployments. Both parts are end-of-life and were released on the same date, September 7, 2014, with the 2643 v3 carrying a launch MSRP of $1552 and the 2630 v3 a launch MSRP of $667.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher base clock speed?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2643 v3 has a base clock of 3.40 GHz, which is 1.0 GHz higher than the Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3’s 2.40 GHz base clock.

Q: How many cores does each processor have?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2643 v3 has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3 has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What is the difference in their average benchmark scores?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2643 v3 has an average benchmark score of 2511, which is 0.2% higher than the Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3’s 2507.

Q: Which processor wins the Cinebench R23 multicore test?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2643 v3 wins with a score of 8682, a 0.2% margin over the Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3’s 8668.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon E5-2643 v3 and the Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3 support ECC memory.

Q: What is the TDP of each processor?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2643 v3 has a TDP of 135 W, while the Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3 has a TDP of 85 W.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications, all of which are reflected in their benchmark performance. The core and thread counts are the most obvious divergence: the 2643 v3 has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the 2630 v3 has 8 cores and 16 threads. Clock speeds follow the inverse pattern, with the 2643 v3 running at 3.40 GHz base and 3.70 GHz boost, versus the 2630 v3’s 2.40 GHz base and 3.20 GHz boost. This yields a 135 W TDP for the 2643 v3 and an 85 W TDP for the 2630 v3.

Memory bandwidth is also different: the 2643 v3 supports 68.3 GB/s, while the 2630 v3 supports 59.7 GB/s. The launch MSRP differs as well, with the 2643 v3 at $1552 and the 2630 v3 at $667. The part numbers are distinct, with the 2643 v3 listed as SR204SR1XQ and the 2630 v3 as SR206. All other specifications are identical: both use the Intel Socket 2011-3, Haswell-EP architecture, 22 nm process node, 2,600 million transistors, 356 mm² die size, 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, 20 MB shared L3 cache, DDR4 memory support, quad-channel memory bus, ECC memory, PCIe Gen 3 with 40 lanes, no integrated graphics, and the same release date of September 7, 2014.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results tell a story of near-perfect parity with a consistent, if tiny, edge for the 2643 v3. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the 2643 v3 scores 875 against the 2630 v3’s 873, a 0.2% delta. The single-core R15 test is a dead heat at 123 points for both, with a 0% delta. Moving to Cinebench R20, the 2643 v3 takes multicore with 3646 versus 3640 (0.2% delta) and single-core with 514 versus 513 (0.2% delta). Cinebench R23 shows the same pattern: the 2643 v3 wins multicore at 8682 versus 8668 (0.2% delta) and single-core at 1225 versus 1223 (0.2% delta).

The biggest win for the 2643 v3 is in Cinebench R23 multicore, where the 14-point gap (8682 vs 8668) represents the largest absolute difference in the dataset. Yet, that is still only a 0.2% margin. The single-core R15 test is the only tie, with both chips scoring 123. The 2630 v3’s best showing is in Cinebench R15 multicore, where it trails by just 2 points (873 vs 875). Across all six tests, the 2643 v3’s wins are consistent but narrow, underscoring that the two processors are closer in real-world performance than their core and clock differences might suggest. The 2643 v3’s higher memory bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s against 59.7 GB/s likely helps it maintain this edge in the multicore tests, despite having fewer cores.

The Verdict

From the data, the Intel Xeon E5-2643 v3 is the superior choice for single-threaded performance and for workloads that benefit from higher memory bandwidth. Its base and boost clocks of 3.40 GHz and 3.70 GHz, respectively, give it a measurable, if small, advantage in every Cinebench test, and its 68.3 GB/s memory bandwidth is 14% higher than the 2630 v3’s 59.7 GB/s. For users running latency-sensitive applications or lightly threaded tasks, the 2643 v3’s six wins out of six head-to-head benchmarks make it the clear pick, despite its higher 135 W TDP.

The Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3, however, is the better option for highly parallel workloads that can utilize its 8 cores and 16 threads. While it loses all six benchmarks, its multicore scores trail by only 0.2% in each case, meaning the two additional cores nearly compensate for the 1.0 GHz base clock deficit. Its 85 W TDP makes it more power-efficient, and its launch MSRP of $667 is significantly lower than the 2643 v3’s $1552. For server deployments where core count and power draw are prioritized over raw clock speed, the 2630 v3 is the data-backed choice.

The verdict is split by use case, not by overall superiority. The 2643 v3 wins every measured benchmark, but the 2630 v3’s aggregate score of 2507 is within 0.2% of the 2643 v3’s 2511, and both sit at the 49th percentile of all CPUs. Buyers seeking maximum per-thread speed should pick the 2643 v3; buyers seeking maximum thread count per watt should pick the 2630 v3. The benchmarks do not justify a universal recommendation for either part.