Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 9 7950X outperforms Xeon E5-1620 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Ryzen 9 7950X is 3857 days newer than Xeon E5-1620.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620
- Consumes up to 24% less energy than AMD Ryzen 9 7950X - 130 vs 170 Watts
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 9 7950X
- Performs up to 68% better in Rust than Xeon E5-1620 - 268 vs 160 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Xeon E5-1620 - 32 vs 8 threads
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-1620 doesn't have integrated graphics
Rust
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Desktop • Sep 27th, 2022
FPS
268
100%
Value, €/FPS
€2.01/FPS
100%
Price, €
€789
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for €789 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 220 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Server/Workstation • Mar 6th, 2012
Desktop • Sep 27th, 2022
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-1620 | vs | AMD Ryzen 9 7950X |
---|---|---|
Mar 6th, 2012 | Release Date | Sep 27th, 2022 |
Xeon E5 | Collection | Ryzen 9 |
Sandy Bridge-EP | Codename | Raphael |
Intel Socket 2011 | Socket | AMD Socket AM5 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 16 |
8 | Threads | 32 |
3.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 4.5 GHz |
3.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.7 GHz |
130 W | TDP | 170 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 5 nm |
36.0x | Multiplier | 45.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Radeon Graphics |
No | Overclockable | Yes |