Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-1620 v4 outperforms Ryzen 3 3200G on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Xeon E5-1620 v4 is 1112 days older than Ryzen 3 3200G.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4
- Performs up to 0% better in Monster Hunter: World than Ryzen 3 3200G - 254 vs 253 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD Ryzen 3 3200G - 8 vs 4 threads
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 3 3200G
- Consumes up to 54% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 65 vs 140 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 doesn't have integrated graphics
Monster Hunter: World
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Highest
Desktop • Jul 7th, 2019
FPS
253
99%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$0.57/FPS
100%
Price, CA$
CA$142.95
100%
Value Winner
Buy for CA$142.95 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 17950 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Highest
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Desktop • Jul 7th, 2019
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 | vs | AMD Ryzen 3 3200G |
---|---|---|
Jun 20th, 2016 | Release Date | Jul 7th, 2019 |
Xeon E5 | Collection | Ryzen 3 |
Broadwell-E/EP | Codename | Picasso |
Intel Socket 2011-3 | Socket | AMD Socket AM4 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 4 |
8 | Threads | 4 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.6 GHz |
3.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.0 GHz |
140 W | TDP | 65 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 12 nm |
35.0x | Multiplier | 36.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Radeon Vega 8 |
No | Overclockable | Yes |