Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 9 5950X 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 5950X is 1599 days newer than the cheaper Xeon E5-1620 v4.
Advantages of Xeon E5-1620 v4
- Up to 33% cheaper than Ryzen 9 5950X - $188.40 vs $279.19
- Up to 23% better value when playing Assassin's Creed Odyssey than Ryzen 9 5950X - $1.66 vs $2.15 per FPS
Advantages of Ryzen 9 5950X
- Performs up to 14% better in Assassin's Creed Odyssey than Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 144 vs 126 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
Assassin's Creed Odyssey
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
FPS
126
88%
Value, €/FPS
€1.66/FPS
100%
Price, €
€209.12
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €209.12 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 0 minutes ago
Buy for €309.9 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 84 minutes ago
Trending Games
With selected game settings
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Desktop • Nov 5th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Xeon E5-1620 v4 | vs | Ryzen 9 5950X |
---|---|---|
Jun 20th, 2016 | Release Date | Nov 5th, 2020 |
Xeon E5 | Collection | Ryzen 9 |
Broadwell-E/EP | Codename | Vermeer |
Intel Socket 2011-3 | Socket | AMD Socket AM4 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 16 |
8 | Threads | 32 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.4 GHz |
3.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.9 GHz |
140 W | TDP | 105 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 7 nm |
35.0x | Multiplier | 34.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |