Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-1620 v4 outperforms Core i3-4130 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 1023 days newer than Core i3-4130.
Advantages of Intel Core i3-4130
- Consumes up to 61% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 54 vs 140 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4
- Performs up to 8% better in Immortals of Aveum than Core i3-4130 - 42 vs 39 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i3-4130 - 8 vs 4 threads
Immortals of Aveum
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
FPS
42
100%
Value, £/FPS
£1.19/FPS
100%
Price, £
£49.95
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for £49.95 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 12228 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2013
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i3-4130 | vs | Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 |
---|---|---|
Sep 1st, 2013 | Release Date | Jun 20th, 2016 |
Core i3 | Collection | Xeon E5 |
Haswell | Codename | Broadwell-E/EP |
Intel Socket 1150 | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 4 |
4 | Threads | 8 |
3.4 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.8 GHz |
54 W | TDP | 140 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
34.0x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
Intel HD 4400 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | No |