| | | | | | |

Xeon E5-2620 v4 vs Core i5-10300H


Description
The E5-2620 v4 is based on Broadwell architecture while the i5-10300H is based on Comet Lake.

Using the multithread performance as a reference, the E5-2620 v4 gets a score of 237.8 k points while the i5-10300H gets 246.1 k points.

Summarizing, the i5-10300H is 1 times faster than the E5-2620 v4. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.

Specs
CPUID
406f1
a0652
Core
Broadwell-EP
Comet Lake-H
Architecture
Base frecuency
2.1 GHz
2.5 GHz
Boost frecuency
3 GHz
4.5 GHz
Socket
Socket 2011-3
BGA 1440
Cores/Threads
8/16
4/8
TDP
85 W
45 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
8x32+8x32 kB
4x32+4x32 kB
Cache L2
8x256 kB
4x256 kB
Cache L3
20480 kB
8192 kB
Date
March 2016
April 2020
Mean monothread perf.
29.39k points
69.47k points
Mean multithread perf.
237.83k points
246.07k 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
E5-2620 v4
i5-10300H
Test#1 (Integers)
6.04k
15.65k (x2.59)
Test#2 (FP)
10.18k
23.13k (x2.27)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
2.74k
5.66k (x2.06)
Test#1 (Memory)
2.41k
11.43k (x4.75)
TOTAL
21.37k
55.87k (x2.61)

Multithread

E5-2620 v4

i5-10300H
Test#1 (Integers)
47.51k
26.77k (x0.56)
Test#2 (FP)
75.12k
43.81k (x0.58)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
19.72k
10.17k (x0.52)
Test#1 (Memory)
5.45k
11.91k (x2.18)
TOTAL
147.8k
92.66k (x0.63)

AVX2 optimized benchmark
The benchmark in mode III (AVX2), like AVX1, is optimized to used 256 bits registers beside the second version of the Advanced Vector Extensions (AVX). The first AVX2 compatible CPU was released in 2013.
Monothread
E5-2620 v4
i5-10300H
Test#1 (Integers)
12.16k
27.14k (x2.23)
Test#2 (FP)
11.82k
24.75k (x2.09)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
3.02k
5.73k (x1.9)
Test#1 (Memory)
2.4k
11.84k (x4.94)
TOTAL
29.39k
69.47k (x2.36)

Multithread

E5-2620 v4

i5-10300H
Test#1 (Integers)
103.77k
105.77k (x1.02)
Test#2 (FP)
102.28k
107.47k (x1.05)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
26.13k
24.82k (x0.95)
Test#1 (Memory)
5.65k
8.02k (x1.42)
TOTAL
237.83k
246.07k (x1.03)

Performance/W
E5-2620 v4
i5-10300H
Test#1 (Integers)
1221 points/W
2350 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
1203 points/W
2388 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
307 points/W
552 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
66 points/W
178 points/W
TOTAL
2798 points/W
5468 points/W

Performance/GHz
E5-2620 v4
i5-10300H
Test#1 (Integers)
4054 points/GHz
6031 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
3939 points/GHz
5500 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1005 points/GHz
1274 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
799 points/GHz
2632 points/GHz
TOTAL
9798 points/GHz
15437 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.


Test#1 (Integers) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#2 (FP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#3 (Generic, ZIP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#1 (Memory) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com

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.


Test#1 (Integers) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#2 (FP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#3 (Generic, ZIP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#1 (Memory) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com

Hardlimit Benchmark Central - Ver. 3.11.4