Key Differences
In short — Core i5-9400F outperforms Xeon E5-1620 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i5-9400F is 2499 days newer than Xeon E5-1620.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i5-9400F - 8 vs 6 threads
Advantages of Intel Core i5-9400F
- Performs up to 5% better in Red Dead Redemption 2 than Xeon E5-1620 - 158 vs 151 FPS
- Consumes up to 50% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 - 65 vs 130 Watts
Red Dead Redemption 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Highest
Desktop • Jan 8th, 2019
FPS
158
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$0.74/FPS
100%
Price, CA$
CA$117.62
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for CA$117.62 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 3 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Highest
Server/Workstation • Mar 6th, 2012
Desktop • Jan 8th, 2019
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-1620 | vs | Intel Core i5-9400F |
---|---|---|
Mar 6th, 2012 | Release Date | Jan 8th, 2019 |
Xeon E5 | Collection | Core i5 |
Sandy Bridge-EP | Codename | Coffee Lake |
Intel Socket 2011 | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 6 |
8 | Threads | 6 |
3.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.9 GHz |
3.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.1 GHz |
130 W | TDP | 65 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
36.0x | Multiplier | 29.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | No |