Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 9 3950X 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 Ryzen 9 3950X is 1253 days newer than the cheaper Xeon E5-1620 v4.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4
- Up to 72% cheaper than Ryzen 9 3950X - $99.89 vs $361.95
- Up to 68% better value when playing Cyberpunk 2077 than Ryzen 9 3950X - $1.56 vs $4.9 per FPS
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 9 3950X
- Performs up to 15% better in Cyberpunk 2077 than Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 82 vs 71 FPS
- Consumes up to 25% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 105 vs 140 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 32 vs 8 threads
Cyberpunk 2077
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
RT Overdrive
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
FPS
71
86%
Value, €/FPS
€1.56/FPS
100%
Price, €
€110.88
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €110.88 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 11888 minutes ago
Buy for €401.76 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 11887 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
RT Overdrive
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Desktop • Nov 25th, 2019
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 | vs | AMD Ryzen 9 3950X |
---|---|---|
Jun 20th, 2016 | Release Date | Nov 25th, 2019 |
Xeon E5 | Collection | Ryzen 9 |
Broadwell-E/EP | Codename | Matisse |
Intel Socket 2011-3 | Socket | AMD Socket AM4 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 16 |
8 | Threads | 32 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
3.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.7 GHz |
140 W | TDP | 105 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 7 nm |
35.0x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |