Xeon E5-2690 v3 vs Ryzen 9 7940HS
Description
The E5-2690 v3 is based on Haswell architecture while the 7940HS is based on Zen 4.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the E5-2690 v3 gets a score of 1016.4 k points while the 7940HS gets 718.6 k points.
Summarizing, the E5-2690 v3 is 1.4 times faster than the 7940HS. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the E5-2690 v3 gets a score of 1016.4 k points while the 7940HS gets 718.6 k points.
Summarizing, the E5-2690 v3 is 1.4 times faster than the 7940HS. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Specs
CPUID
306f2
a70f41
Core
Haswell-EP
Phoenix
Base frecuency
2.6 GHz
4 GHz
Boost frecuency
3.5 GHz
5.2 GHz
Socket
LGA 2011-3
BGA-FP7r2
Cores/Threads
12/24
8/16
TDP
135 W
35 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
12x32+12x32 kB
8x32+8x32 kB
Cache L2
12x256 kB
8x1024 kB
Cache L3
30720 kB
16384 kB
Date
September 2014
March 2023
Mean monothread perf.
40.71k points
113.57k points
Mean multithread perf.
1016.36k points
718.59k points
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
E5-2690 v3
7940HS
Test#1 (Integers)
20.96k
38.25k (x1.82)
Test#2 (FP)
11.74k
29.92k (x2.55)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
4.61k
15.5k (x3.36)
Test#1 (Memory)
3.4k
29.89k (x8.8)
TOTAL
40.71k
113.57k (x2.79)
Multithread
E5-2690 v3
7940HS
Test#1 (Integers)
531.68k
309.6k (x0.58)
Test#2 (FP)
342.28k
260.4k (x0.76)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
133.22k
128.56k (x0.97)
Test#1 (Memory)
9.19k
20.04k (x2.18)
TOTAL
1016.36k
718.59k (x0.71)
Performance/W
E5-2690 v3
7940HS
Test#1 (Integers)
3938 points/W
8846 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
2535 points/W
7440 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
987 points/W
3673 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
68 points/W
573 points/W
TOTAL
7529 points/W
20531 points/W
Performance/GHz
E5-2690 v3
7940HS
Test#1 (Integers)
5988 points/GHz
7355 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
3356 points/GHz
5755 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1318 points/GHz
2981 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
971 points/GHz
5748 points/GHz
TOTAL
11632 points/GHz
21839 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