Key Differences
In short — Core i9-14900K outperforms the cheaper Xeon E5-1620 v4 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Xeon E5-1620 v4 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i9-14900K is 2675 days newer than the cheaper Xeon E5-1620 v4.
Advantages of Intel Core i9-14900K
- Performs up to 4% better in Tom Clancy’s The Division 2 than Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 240 vs 231 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 32 vs 8 threads
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4
- Up to 46% cheaper than Core i9-14900K - $169.73 vs $316.68
- Up to 44% better value when playing Tom Clancy’s The Division 2 than Core i9-14900K - $0.82 vs $1.46 per FPS
Tom Clancy’s The Division 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Oct 17th, 2023
FPS
240
100%
Value, €/FPS
€1.46/FPS
56%
Price, €
€351.52
53%
FPS Winner
Buy for €351.52 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 57 minutes ago
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
FPS
231
96%
Value, €/FPS
€0.82/FPS
100%
Price, €
€188.4
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €188.4 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 60 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Oct 17th, 2023
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i9-14900K | vs | Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 |
---|---|---|
Oct 17th, 2023 | Release Date | Jun 20th, 2016 |
Core i9 | Collection | Xeon E5 |
Raptor Lake | Codename | Broadwell-E/EP |
Intel Socket 1700 | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
24 | Cores | 4 |
32 | Threads | 8 |
3.2 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
6.0 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.8 GHz |
Not Available | TDP | 140 W |
10 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
32.0x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
UHD Graphics 770 | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | No |