Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-2620 v3 outperforms FX-8120 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Xeon E5-2620 v3 is 1062 days newer than FX-8120.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3
- Performs up to 5% better in Elden Ring than FX-8120 - 116 vs 110 FPS
- Consumes up to 32% less energy than AMD FX-8120 - 85 vs 125 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-8120 - 12 vs 8 threads
Elden Ring
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Maximum
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Maximum
FX-8120
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
Xeon E5-2620 v3
Server/Workstation • Sep 8th, 2014
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-8120 | vs | Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 |
|---|---|---|
| Oct 12th, 2011 | Release Date | Sep 8th, 2014 |
| FX | Collection | Xeon E5 |
| Zambezi | Codename | Haswell-E |
| AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Desktop | Segment | Server |
8 | Cores | 6 |
| 8 | Threads | 12 |
3.1 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.4 GHz |
3.4 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.2 GHz |
| 125 W | TDP | 85 W |
| 32 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
| 15.5x | Multiplier | 24.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | No |
