Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3

The Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 is a 16-core, 32-thread Haswell-EP processor designed for the server and workstation segment, now end-of-life. Its benchmark data reveals a processor whose multi-threaded capabilities remain relevant, but whose single-thread performance is firmly anchored in an older era. The data shows a processor that occupies a specific niche: it is a strong multi-tasking workhorse that lags behind modern architectures in per-core responsiveness.

Benchmark Performance

The most striking result in the data is the processor's average benchmark score of 4004, which places it at the 60th percentile of all CPUs. This is a mid-pack standing, but the composition of that score is heavily tilted toward multi-threaded workloads. In Cinebench R23, the multicore score of 13843 demonstrates substantial throughput, while the single-core score of 1954 tells a very different story—one of modest per-thread capability.

Comparing to its nearest rivals, the performance picture is remarkably tight. The E5-2698B v3 trails the Intel Core i9-9900 by a mere 0.1% in average score, and it also lags the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4655G by 0.2%. Conversely, it edges out the Intel Core i9-13900TE by 0.1% and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X by 0.2%. These deltas are within the margin of error, indicating that the Xeon's overall compute average is statistically equivalent to these four very different processors. However, this aggregate equivalence masks significant differences in workload-specific behavior.

In Cinebench R20, the multicore score of 5814 highlights a processor that can still handle heavy parallel tasks. The R15 multicore score of 1395 further corroborates this. The data indicates that in pure multi-threaded throughput, this 16-core Xeon punches at a level comparable to much newer mainstream and even some high-end desktop parts. The key takeaway is not that it wins outright, but that its multi-core muscle allows it to compete in the same statistical tier as these rivals, despite being based on a much older architecture.

Power and Thermals

The processor carries a Thermal Design Power (TDP) of 135 watts. This figure defines its cooling and power delivery requirements. For a 16-core Haswell part, a 135W TDP classifies it as a high-power component that necessitates a capable air cooler or a modest liquid cooling solution to maintain stable operation under sustained load.

This TDP places it in a category where system builders must account for adequate chassis airflow and a motherboard with robust VRM cooling. The 22 nm process node means that heat density is higher than on modern 10 nm or 7 nm parts, so the cooling solution should be more substantial than what a typical mainstream desktop CPU requires. The data suggests that while a high-end tower cooler is sufficient, it is not a processor that can be paired with a low-profile or stock-style cooler for extended all-core workloads.

Single-Thread vs Multi-Thread Behavior

The split between single-thread and multi-thread performance is the defining characteristic of this Xeon. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1954 is low by modern standards, indicating a significant weakness in lightly-threaded tasks. In contrast, the multicore score of 13843 shows that when all 16 cores are engaged, the processor delivers strong aggregate performance.

This divergence means that the E5-2698B v3 excels in workloads that scale well across many cores, such as video rendering, 3D scene compilation, or scientific simulations. The data shows a clear strength in parallel throughput. However, for tasks that rely on a single fast core—such as many older games, general desktop responsiveness, or certain scripting workloads—the processor will feel comparatively sluggish. The 3.40 GHz boost clock is not sufficient to overcome the architectural IPC deficit of Haswell when compared to modern designs. The benchmark results indicate a processor that is a specialist in parallel computation, not a generalist.

Who Should Consider It

Given the benchmark profile, this processor is best suited for users whose primary applications are heavily multi-threaded. The data supports its use in video encoding, 3D rendering, and software compilation, where the 16 cores and 32 threads can be fully utilized to minimize render or compile times.

Gamers should be cautious. While the multi-core scores are respectable, the single-core performance is a bottleneck for many gaming scenarios. A processor with a higher single-thread score will provide better frame rates in CPU-bound titles. The data does not support this Xeon as a gaming-first choice.

For office and productivity tasks, the processor is overkill. Basic tasks like word processing and spreadsheet management will not utilize the 16 cores, and the weaker single-thread performance means that everyday responsiveness will not feel as snappy as with a modern mainstream chip. This is a processor for a specific professional workload, not a general-purpose desktop CPU.

How It Compares

Intel Core i9-9900: The E5-2698B v3 is statistically tied with the i9-9900, trailing by just 0.1% in average score. This is surprising given the i9-9900 is a much newer consumer part. The Xeon achieves this parity through its 16 cores versus the i9's 8 cores, compensating for the i9's superior per-core speed with more parallel throughput.

Intel Core i9-13900TE: The Xeon leads this rival by 0.1%. The 13900TE is a power-efficient variant of the 13th Gen series, and its lower power envelope limits its multi-core output. The data shows that the older, higher-power Xeon can match or slightly exceed it in aggregate compute, despite the massive generational difference.

AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4655G: A 0.2% deficit to this AMD part places the Xeon in a dead heat. The 4655G is a 6-core APU, so this comparison highlights the Xeon's advantage in core count being nearly perfectly offset by the Ryzen's much higher single-thread efficiency in the average score.

AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X: The Xeon leads by 0.2%. The 1900X is an 8-core high-end desktop part. The data indicates that the Xeon's 16 cores provide just enough additional throughput in multi-threaded benchmarks to overcome the Threadripper's likely advantage in memory latency and single-thread speed.

Platform and Compatibility

The E5-2698B v3 is built for the Intel Socket 2011-3 platform. It uses the Haswell-EP architecture on a 22 nm process with 2,600 million transistors on a 356 mm² die. Memory support is DDR4 via a quad-channel bus, offering a memory bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s, which is essential for feeding the 16 cores.

The processor includes 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU, providing substantial connectivity for multiple GPUs or high-speed NVMe storage. It supports ECC memory, a key feature for workstation reliability. The platform is end-of-life, meaning the upgrade path is limited to other LGA 2011-3 Xeon or Core i7 parts, all of which are also older architectures. There is no path to newer processor generations without a full motherboard and memory change.

FAQ

Q: Is the Intel Xeon E5-2698B v3 good for gaming?

A: The data suggests it is not ideal. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1954 is low, and most games depend heavily on single-thread performance. While its multi-core score of 13843 is strong, the weak single-core result will bottleneck gaming performance.

Q: How does it compare to the Intel Core i9-9900?

A: Benchmark results show they are statistically identical, with the Xeon trailing by only 0.1% in average score. The Xeon relies on its 16 cores to match the i9-9900, which has fewer cores but a significantly newer and faster architecture per core.

Q: What memory type does it support?

A: It supports DDR4 memory over a quad-channel bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s. It also supports ECC memory for error correction in critical workloads.

Q: What is the processor's cooling requirement?

A: With a TDP of 135 watts, it requires a robust cooling solution. A capable air cooler is sufficient, but given the older 22 nm process, a high-end tower or basic liquid cooler is recommended for sustained all-core loads.

Q: Does this processor have integrated graphics?

A: No. The data lists no integrated graphics, meaning a discrete graphics card is mandatory for any display output. This is typical for server and workstation Xeon processors.

Q: Can I upgrade to a newer processor on the same motherboard?

A: No. The processor uses the Intel Socket 2011-3 platform, which is end-of-life. Any upgrade would require a new motherboard, and likely new memory, as newer platforms use different sockets and memory standards.