In Battlefield 6, the Core i3-4010U is slightly slower than the Xeon E5-2699A v4. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i3-4010U
- Consumes up to 90% less energy – 15 vs 145 Watts
- Consumes up to 90% less energy
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
Xeon E5-2699A v4
- Up to 3% faster in Battlefield 6 – 63 vs 61 FPS
- Up to 3% faster in Battlefield 6
- Is 3 years and 4 months newer – Oct 25, 2016 vs Jun 04, 2013
- Is 3 years and 4 months newer
Battlefield 6 FPS Calculator
Core i3-4010U vs Xeon E5-2699A v4: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
Xeon E5-2699A v4
Oct 25th, 2016
Average FPS
63 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
47 FPS
100%
Price, $
$1078.93
100%
Value, $/FPS
$17.12/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i3-4010U vs Xeon E5-2699A v4 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i3-4010U vs Xeon E5-2699A v4 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i3-4010U
Jun 4th, 2013
Cores
2-core
9%
L3 Cache
3 MB
5%
Base Frequency
1.7 GHz
71%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Xeon E5-2699A v4
Oct 25th, 2016
Cores
22-core
100%
L3 Cache
55 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.4 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.6 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2400 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i3-4010U Jun 4th, 2013 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Xeon E5-2699A v4 Oct 25th, 2016 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Jun 4th, 2013 | Released | Oct 25th, 2016 |
| – | MSRP | $4,938.00 |
Laptop | Segment | Desktop |
| Intel BGA 1168 | Socket | LGA2011-3 |
15 W | Power Consumption | 145 W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 2400 MHz (DDR4) |
Intel HD 4400 | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
