Core i3-7100 vs Xeon E5-1620 v2
Description
The i3-7100 is based on Kaby Lake architecture while the E5-1620 v2 is based on Ivy Bridge.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the i3-7100 gets a score of 100.1 k points while the E5-1620 v2 gets 144.6 k points.
Summarizing, the E5-1620 v2 is 1.4 times faster than the i3-7100. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the i3-7100 gets a score of 100.1 k points while the E5-1620 v2 gets 144.6 k points.
Summarizing, the E5-1620 v2 is 1.4 times faster than the i3-7100. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Specs
CPUID
906e9
306e4
Core
Kaby Lake-S
Ivy Bridge-EP
Base frecuency
3.9 GHz
3.7 GHz
Boost frecuency
3.9 GHz
3.9 GHz
Socket
LGA 1151
LGA 2011
Cores/Threads
2/4
4 /8
TDP
51 W
130 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
2x32+2x32 kB
4x32+x4x32 kB
Cache L2
2x256 kB
4x256 kB
Cache L3
3072 kB
10240 kB
Date
January 2017
September 2013
Mean monothread perf.
57.86k points
34.37k points
Mean multithread perf.
124.8k points
144.57k points
AVX optimized benchmark
The benchmark in mode II (AVX) is optimized to used 256 bits registers beside the first version of the Advanced Vector Extensions (AVX). The first AVX compatible CPU was released in 2011.
Monothread
i3-7100
E5-1620 v2
Test#1 (Integers)
14.41k
12.55k (x0.87)
Test#2 (FP)
22.38k
12.14k (x0.54)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.45k
4.83k (x0.89)
Test#1 (Memory)
4.96k
4.85k (x0.98)
TOTAL
47.21k
34.37k (x0.73)
Multithread
i3-7100
E5-1620 v2
Test#1 (Integers)
30.48k
51.93k (x1.7)
Test#2 (FP)
52.08k
56.7k (x1.09)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
12.97k
23.81k (x1.84)
Test#1 (Memory)
4.56k
12.14k (x2.66)
TOTAL
100.1k
144.57k (x1.44)
Performance/W
i3-7100
E5-1620 v2
Test#1 (Integers)
598 points/W
399 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
1021 points/W
436 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
254 points/W
183 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
89 points/W
93 points/W
TOTAL
1963 points/W
1112 points/W
Performance/GHz
i3-7100
E5-1620 v2
Test#1 (Integers)
3695 points/GHz
3217 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
5739 points/GHz
3113 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1399 points/GHz
1238 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
1273 points/GHz
1244 points/GHz
TOTAL
12105 points/GHz
8812 points/GHz
Monothread performance graph
Monothread performance graphics gives the performance vs time. They are useful to measure the time it takes to the CPU to reach the maximum performance.
Usually, CPU's performance will be steady during these tests but if it has a slow frequency strategy, the first samples will show a lower score.
Usually, CPU's performance will be steady during these tests but if it has a slow frequency strategy, the first samples will show a lower score.
Test#1 (Integers) [points vs time]
Test#2 (FP) [points vs time]
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP) [points vs time]
Test#1 (Memory) [points vs time]
Multithread performance graph
Multithread graphs measure the performance against a heavy load during certain time.
If CPU's TDP doesn't limit the frequency and the machine is properly cooled, performance should remain steady vs time. Otherwise, the performance score will oscillate or decrease over time.
If CPU's TDP doesn't limit the frequency and the machine is properly cooled, performance should remain steady vs time. Otherwise, the performance score will oscillate or decrease over time.
Test#1 (Integers) [points vs time]
Test#2 (FP) [points vs time]
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP) [points vs time]
Test#1 (Memory) [points vs time]
Hardlimit Benchmark Central - Ver. 3.11.4