We have known for a while that the Ivy Bridge-E launch will supposedly take place in a few weeks time, with information about pricing of the consumer components coming to light recently.  Despite the high cost of entry for consumers, the business aspect of these processors along the Xeon brand is arguably the more poignant and certainly the more profitable aspect of the business.  Recently CPU-World has put many of the pieces of the puzzle together, from a variety of leaks from partners, in terms of which processors are being released, their intimate details, and importantly, pricing.

To follow on the naming scheme of Sandy Bridge -> Ivy Bridge -> Haswell Xeons, these processors, destined for 2P systems, will take on the E5 26xx naming scheme with V2 on the end, with L designating low power versions.  We have the following list to browse and prepare servers for:

Model Cores Frequency L3 cache TDP Pre-order price
Xeon E5-2603 v2 4 1.8 GHz 10 MB 80 Watt $231.62
Xeon E5-2609 v2 4 2.5 GHz 10 MB 80 Watt $337.03
Xeon E5-2620 v2 6 2.1 GHz 15 MB 80 Watt $464.48
Xeon E5-2630 v2 6 2.6 GHz 15 MB 80 Watt  
Xeon E5-2630L v2 6 2.4 GHz 15 MB   $701.01
Xeon E5-2637 v2 4 3.5 GHz 15 MB   $1140.99
Xeon E5-2640 v2 8 2 GHz 20 MB 95 Watt $1013.54
Xeon E5-2643 v2 6 3.5 GHz 25 MB 130 Watt  
Xeon E5-2650 v2 8 2.6 GHz 20 MB 95 Watt $1335.85
Xeon E5-2650L v2 10 1.7 GHz 25 MB 70 Watt $1395.91
Xeon E5-2660 v2 10 2.2 GHz 25 MB 95 Watt $1590.78
Xeon E5-2667 v2 8 3.3 GHz 25 MB 130 Watt $2320.64
Xeon E5-2670 v2 10 2.5 GHz 25 MB 115 Watt  
Xeon E5-2680 v2 10 2.8 GHz 25 MB 115 Watt $1943.93
Xeon E5-2687W v2 8 3.4 GHz 20 MB 150 Watt $2414.35
Xeon E5-2690 v2 10 3 GHz 25 MB 130 Watt $2355.52
Xeon E5-2695 v2 12 2.4 GHz 30 MB 115 Watt $2675.39
Xeon E5-2697 v2 12 2.7 GHz 30 MB 130 Watt $2949.69

Most of these cores will feature Hyperthreading, giving between 4 and 24 threads within an 80-150W envelope.  These prices are currently listed as consumer based pre-order prices, and equate to ~12-30% more than the current Sandy Bridge-E offerings.  We expect none of these parts to be overclockable via the multiplier, following Intel's previous Xeon launches.

With any luck we should be getting a couple of Ivy Bridge-E based server motherboards in to test, along with Xeon processors.  Interestingly enough, vague rumours of a 15 core chip have not evolved into anything concrete as of yet, at least not to be released at the same time as the others.

Source: CPU-World

POST A COMMENT

52 Comments

View All Comments

  • Kevin G - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - link

    The 15 core chip is Ivy Bridge EX which will go into a different socket. The internal arrangement of cores is expected to be 5 x 3 which makes it native 15 core. Reply
  • iwod - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - link

    I understand AMD isn't competitive. But why are they not releasing something that at least try to complete? At these price there are lot of margin to understand Intel even if it means AMD will earn relatively little. So earning a consumer desktop CPU margin on a Server grade product seems doable.

    I wonder if OpenPOWER will disrupt Intel in server market.
    Reply
  • bobbozzo - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - link

    AMD has had 16-core Opterons for quite awhile; I bought 2 for a 2-socket server (upgrading from 1 8-core Opteron, using the same server) recently, which will be running ESXi aka VSphere with 48GB of RAM (the server can go to at least 128GB).

    Intel has nothing to compete with a 32-core 2-socket server.
    Intel's IPC is higher, and in some cases power efficiency, but their prices are much higher too.

    Opterons make great database servers too, and in some cases are great for HPC.
    Reply
  • Gondalf - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - link

    This was partially true with the 32nm line. Now we have 50% more cores and 50% more L3 at the same power consumption. Unfortunately in this situation Amd is not competitive in ALL kinds of server workloads, even in HPC and some (not all) database applications.
    It's pretty certain Amd will lose its little residual market share in server...but this is not an Intel fault, it was an Amd choice to abandon this segment of cpu business, yes because it is !! Amd has chosen to do a game Soc instead of a 2014 refresh in 28nm of the Opetron line.
    Frankly speaking i do not understand Amd execs, x86 cpus server market wlll grow up to 20B in 2016 from actual around 12B , this move has not a common sense. Selling cheap Socs for consoles do not gives much revenue and it is not a long term solution to consolidate a robust success in upcoming ten years.
    As usual ...good for Intel........it will eat all the apple.
    Reply
  • duploxxx - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - link

    while partially correct, it is the IT world itself which is killing AMD, if you would see how many tenders I work for demand Intel brand (mainly US and UAE regions) on top of that many older aging management IT who believe Intel is always the only possible brand for desktop - workstation-server. As if AMD is unstable, not performing etc... know your HW and it will work fine we used 1000s of AMD server since the opteron 1200 series. (the only issue at that time was the flaky Nvidia chipset) long gone those days.

    The margins of pushing server opteron get real low for AMD with a share around 10%. On top of that Intel is still demanding to the OEM what to do and what to do not, no longer like the old days but they demand how they can use there platforms and give additional money to the OEM for "designing" additional Intel platforms.... so AMD needs to do the same with way less budget. So we end up in a IT world where the CPu provider is demanding what can be done and what not (even on consumers, ultrabook is a good example)

    but don't worry for those who think Intel only is a good deal. look at the 2680 and 2690 series v2 now and you know what will come, way to high prices and they will never go down again, own fault. We will suffer in general. Consumer is the looser.

    Today I am still happy to say that I can sell servers with 12-16core AMD cpu as a medio budget server for hypervisor. Even without calculating reductions on cpu which is way higher on an AMD then an Intel the AMD6380 will end up against
    Xeon E5-2640 v2 8 2 GHz 20 MB 95 Watt $1013.54

    i will pass for those HT cores on a hypervisor....
    Reply
  • FwFred - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - link

    Hahaha... you're too funny. Want to check the 2-socket server market share? Think it's going to get better with Ivy? Reply
  • Tom Womack - Sunday, August 11, 2013 - link

    AMD would like you to buy a four-socket AMD server if you want to compare with a two-socket Intel server; and it seems that the current $6000 Intel systems are no better in pure computrons than the AMD four-socket box I paid $6000 for two and a half years ago. Reply
  • Tom Womack - Sunday, August 11, 2013 - link

    A four-socket 64-thread Magny Cours machine is still quite competitive with these machines, and not ludicrously expensive; the Opteron 6376 16-core 2.3GHz chip is $800 or so, so you can get four for the price of one 12-core Ivy Bridge, and the chassis with a four-socket motherboard is only about $500 more than the chassis with a two-socket Ivy Bridge board. Reply
  • Eidigean - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - link

    How much is the Mac Pro likely to cost if the 12-core processor alone costs $2675 ?

    I wonder what kind of discount Intel is giving Apple...
    Reply
  • Kevin G - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - link

    There is likely going to be an E5-16xx v2 line too. That should be a bit cheaper. There is the chance that To get the right core/clock count that Apple will have to use an E5-26xx line chip. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now