Key Differences
In short — Ryzen Threadripper 1920X outperforms Xeon E5-2640 v2 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Ryzen Threadripper 1920X is 1439 days newer than Xeon E5-2640 v2.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-2640 v2
- Consumes up to 47% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X - 95 vs 180 Watts
Advantages of AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X
- Performs up to 4% better in ARK: Survival Evolved than Xeon E5-2640 v2 - 121 vs 116 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Xeon E5-2640 v2 - 24 vs 16 threads
ARK: Survival Evolved
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Desktop • Aug 10th, 2017
FPS
121
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$3.06/FPS
100%
Price, CA$
CA$369.9
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for CA$369.9 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 143 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Server/Workstation • Sep 1st, 2013
Desktop • Aug 10th, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-2640 v2 | vs | AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X |
---|---|---|
Sep 1st, 2013 | Release Date | Aug 10th, 2017 |
Xeon E5 | Collection | Ryzen Threadripper |
Ivy Bridge EP | Codename | Whitehaven |
Intel Socket 2011 | Socket | AMD Socket SP3r2 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 12 |
16 | Threads | 24 |
2.0 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
2.5 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.0 GHz |
95 W | TDP | 180 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
20.0x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |