Key Differences
In short — Core i9-10900F outperforms Xeon E3-1225 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i9-10900F is 3315 days newer than Xeon E3-1225.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E3-1225
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i9-10900F doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Core i9-10900F
- Performs up to 22% better in World of Warcraft than Xeon E3-1225 - 192 vs 158 FPS
- Consumes up to 32% less energy than Intel Xeon E3-1225 - 65 vs 95 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Xeon E3-1225 - 20 vs 4 threads
World of Warcraft
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Maximum
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
192
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$2.02/FPS
100%
Price, CA$
CA$388
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for CA$388 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 185 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Maximum
Server/Workstation • Apr 3rd, 2011
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E3-1225 | vs | Intel Core i9-10900F |
---|---|---|
Apr 3rd, 2011 | Release Date | Apr 30th, 2020 |
Xeon E3 | Collection | Core i9 |
Sandy Bridge | Codename | Comet Lake |
Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 10 |
4 | Threads | 20 |
3.1 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.8 GHz |
3.4 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.2 GHz |
95 W | TDP | 65 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
31.0x | Multiplier | 28.0x |
Intel HD P3000 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | No |