Key Differences
In short — Core i3-12100 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 i3-12100 is 3591 days newer than Xeon E5-1620.
Advantages of Intel Core i3-12100
- Performs up to 25% better in Dying Light 2: Stay Human than Xeon E5-1620 - 146 vs 117 FPS
- Consumes up to 54% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 - 60 vs 130 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-1620 doesn't have integrated graphics
Dying Light 2: Stay Human
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Server/Workstation • Mar 6th, 2012
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2022
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-1620 | vs | Intel Core i3-12100 |
---|---|---|
Mar 6th, 2012 | Release Date | Jan 4th, 2022 |
Xeon E5 | Collection | Core i3 |
Sandy Bridge-EP | Codename | Alder Lake |
Intel Socket 2011 | Socket | Intel Socket 1700 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 4 |
8 | Threads | 8 |
3.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.3 GHz |
3.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.3 GHz |
130 W | TDP | 60 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 10 nm |
36.0x | Multiplier | 33.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 |
No | Overclockable | No |