Key Differences
In short — Ryzen Threadripper 3990X 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 Threadripper 3990X is 1327 days newer than the cheaper Xeon E5-1620 v4.
Advantages of AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X
- Performs up to 2% better in Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order than Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 218 vs 214 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 128 vs 8 threads
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4
- Up to 99% cheaper than Ryzen Threadripper 3990X - £49.95 vs £4250.0
- Up to 99% better value when playing Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order than Ryzen Threadripper 3990X - £0.23 vs £19.5 per FPS
- Consumes up to 50% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X - 140 vs 280 Watts
Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Desktop • Feb 7th, 2020
FPS
218
100%
Value, £/FPS
£19.5/FPS
1%
Price, £
£4250
1%
FPS Winner
Buy for £4,250 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 11204 minutes ago
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
FPS
214
98%
Value, £/FPS
£0.23/FPS
100%
Price, £
£49.95
100%
Value Winner
Buy for £49.95 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 10992 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Desktop • Feb 7th, 2020
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X | vs | Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 |
---|---|---|
Feb 7th, 2020 | Release Date | Jun 20th, 2016 |
Ryzen Threadripper | Collection | Xeon E5 |
Castle Peak | Codename | Broadwell-E/EP |
AMD Socket TRX4 | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
64 | Cores | 4 |
128 | Threads | 8 |
2.9 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
4.3 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.8 GHz |
280 W | TDP | 140 W |
7 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
29.0x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | No |