Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3 vs Intel Xeon E5-4620 v3 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-4620 v3 has 10 cores and 20 threads, while the Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The 4620 v3 therefore offers two additional physical cores and four additional threads.

Q: How do their clock speeds compare?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3 has the higher clock speeds, with a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.20 GHz. The Intel Xeon E5-4620 v3 is clocked lower at 2.00 GHz base and 2.60 GHz boost.

Q: What is the difference in thermal design power (TDP)?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-4620 v3 has a TDP of 105 watts, while the Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3 has a TDP of 85 watts. The 2630 v3 consumes less power under load according to its specified TDP.

Q: Do the two CPUs share the same architecture and process node?

A: Yes, both are built on Intel's Haswell architecture (Haswell-EP codename) using a 22 nm process node. Both have the same transistor count of 2,600 million and the same die size of 356 mm².

Q: Which chip has more L3 cache?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-4620 v3 has 25 MB of shared L3 cache, whereas the Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3 has 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The 4620 v3 holds a 5 MB advantage.

Q: What kind of memory and PCIe support do these processors offer?

A: Both support DDR4 memory with a quad-channel memory bus and have the same memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. Both also support ECC memory and provide PCIe Gen 3 with 40 lanes (CPU only).

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon E5-4620 v3 wins every single head-to-head comparison against the Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3. Across all six Cinebench tests, the 4620 v3 takes the win, with the 2630 v3 recording zero victories. The margins are consistent, ranging from 3.2% to 3.3% in favor of the 4620 v3.

Looking at the broader database context, the Intel Xeon E5-4620 v3 has an average benchmark score of 2587, placing it at the 49th percentile among all CPUs. Its closest rival is the Intel Xeon E-2174G with an average score of 2588 (a 0% delta), followed by the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4355GE at 2596 (-0.3%), the AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS at 2573 (0.5%), and the Intel Core i7-8850H at 2604 (-0.7%). The Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3, meanwhile, has an average benchmark score of 2507, also at the 49th percentile. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon E5-2643 v3 at 2511 (-0.2%), the Intel Xeon E-2144G at 2514 (-0.3%), the Intel Core i5-1155G7 at 2496 (0.4%), and the Intel Core i5-9500T at 2493 (0.6%).

For users who prioritize raw multi-threaded throughput, the Intel Xeon E5-4620 v3 is the clear choice given its 10-core, 20-thread configuration and its victory in every Cinebench multi-core test. That said, the Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3 offers a lower TDP of 85 watts versus 105 watts and higher clock speeds (2.40 GHz base, 3.20 GHz boost), which could make it more suitable for environments where thermal headroom is a constraint. The 2630 v3 also carries a lower launch MSRP of $667, compared to the 4620 v3's launch MSRP of $1668, though both parts are now end-of-life. The data suggests the 4620 v3 is the better performer, but the 2630 v3 is the more power-efficient option that still lands in the same performance percentile.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Xeon E5-4620 v3 dominates every recorded benchmark in this comparison. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the 4620 v3 scores 901 against the 2630 v3's 873, a 3.2% advantage. The single-core result in R15 shows a similar story: 127 versus 123, a 3.3% edge for the 4620 v3.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the pattern holds. The 4620 v3 scores 3757 in multi-core, while the 2630 v3 scores 3640, again a 3.2% difference. In single-core, the 4620 v3 records 530 against 513 for the 2630 v3, a 3.3% margin. The consistency of these deltas across different Cinebench versions indicates a stable performance gap rather than a workload-specific anomaly.

Cinebench R23 continues the trend. The 4620 v3 posts a multi-core score of 8946 versus 8668 for the 2630 v3, a 3.2% lead. In single-core, the 4620 v3 scores 1263, while the 2630 v3 scores 1223, a 3.3% advantage. Across all six tests, the 4620 v3 wins by either 3.2% or 3.3%, never less and never more.

What is notable is that the single-core margins (3.3%) are slightly larger than the multi-core margins (3.2%). This suggests that the 4620 v3's advantage is not purely a matter of core count; it also edges ahead in per-thread performance despite its lower clock speeds. The 2630 v3's higher boost clock of 3.20 GHz does not translate into a single-core win, which speaks to the efficiency of the 4620 v3's implementation.

The data also shows that while the 4620 v3 wins all six head-to-head matchups, the overall magnitude of the advantage is modest. A 3.2% to 3.3% lead is meaningful for consistent multi-threaded workloads, but it is not a generational leap. Both processors sit at the 49th percentile in the database, and their average benchmark scores (2587 for the 4620 v3, 2507 for the 2630 v3) reflect a relatively close overall standing.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specification fields. The Intel Xeon E5-4620 v3 ships with 10 cores and 20 threads, while the Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3 has 8 cores and 16 threads. This is the most significant structural difference between the two parts.

Clock speeds also differ. The 4620 v3 has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 2.60 GHz. The 2630 v3 has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.20 GHz. The 2630 v3 is therefore clocked higher in both states, but the 4620 v3 still wins all benchmark tests.

Thermal design power is another differentiator. The 4620 v3 has a TDP of 105 watts, while the 2630 v3 has a TDP of 85 watts. This makes the 2630 v3 the more power-efficient part on paper, with a 20 watt lower TDP.

L3 cache capacity differs as well. The 4620 v3 has 25 MB of shared L3 cache, while the 2630 v3 has 20 MB of shared L3 cache. Both chips have identical L1 cache at 64 KB per core and L2 cache at 256 KB per core.

The release dates are different: the 4620 v3 was released on May 31, 2015, while the 2630 v3 was released on September 7, 2014. The part numbers also differ, with the 4620 v3 using SR22K and the 2630 v3 using SR206. Both processors share the same socket (Intel Socket 2011-3), the same memory support (DDR4, quad-channel, 59.7 GB/s), the same PCIe configuration (Gen 3, 40 lanes, CPU only), and the same ECC memory support.

Architecture Differences

Both the Intel Xeon E5-4620 v3 and the Intel Xeon E5-2630 v3 are built on the Haswell architecture, specifically the Haswell-EP codename, and belong to the Xeon E5 generation (Haswell-EP). Both are manufactured by Intel on a 22 nm process node, with the same foundry (Intel), the same transistor count of 2,600 million, and the same die size of 356 mm². There is no integrated graphics on either part, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The architectural differences are therefore limited to core configuration, cache capacity, and clock behavior. The 4620 v3 packs more cores (10 versus 8) and more L3 cache (25 MB versus 20 MB), which explains its multi-core advantage. The 2630 v3 compensates with higher base and boost clocks, but the data shows that this clock advantage is not enough to overcome the 4620 v3's additional cores and cache in Cinebench workloads.

Both processors support DDR4 memory with a quad-channel bus and identical memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. Both support ECC memory and offer PCIe Gen 3 with 40 lanes (CPU only). The memory subsystem is effectively identical, so the performance differences observed in the benchmarks can be attributed to core count, cache size, and clock speed trade-offs rather than memory architecture.

The 4620 v3 is the higher-end part in terms of core and cache resources, while the 2630 v3 is a more modest configuration with higher clocks and lower TDP. Both are now end-of-life products, and both sit at the 49th percentile in the database, indicating that they occupy a similar performance tier overall despite their internal differences.