Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-1620 v4 outperforms FX-8150 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Xeon E5-1620 v4 is 1713 days newer than FX-8150.
Advantages of AMD FX-8150
- Consumes up to 11% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 125 vs 140 Watts
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4
- Performs up to 9% better in A Plague Tale: Requiem than FX-8150 - 127 vs 117 FPS
A Plague Tale: Requiem
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
FPS
127
100%
Value, £/FPS
£0.39/FPS
100%
Price, £
£49.95
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for £49.95 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 28 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-8150 | vs | Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 |
---|---|---|
Oct 12th, 2011 | Release Date | Jun 20th, 2016 |
FX | Collection | Xeon E5 |
Zambezi | Codename | Broadwell-E/EP |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 4 |
8 | Threads | 8 |
3.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
3.9 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.8 GHz |
125 W | TDP | 140 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
18.0x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | No |