Key Differences
In short, we have a clear winner — Core i3-6100 outperforms the more expensive Xeon E5-1620 v4 on the selected game parameters, and is also a better bang for your buck! The better performing Core i3-6100 is 293 days older than the more expensive Xeon E5-1620 v4.
Advantages of Intel Core i3-6100
- Performs up to 2% better in Assassin's Creed Odyssey than Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 128 vs 126 FPS
- Up to 42% cheaper than Xeon E5-1620 v4 - £29.1 vs £49.95
- Up to 42% better value when playing Assassin's Creed Odyssey than Xeon E5-1620 v4 - £0.23 vs £0.4 per FPS
- Consumes up to 64% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 51 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
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i3-6100 - 8 vs 4 threads
Assassin's Creed Odyssey
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2015
FPS
128
100%
Value, £/FPS
£0.23/FPS
100%
Price, £
£29.1
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for £29.1 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 206 minutes ago
Buy for £49.95 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 206 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2015
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i3-6100 | vs | Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 |
---|---|---|
Sep 1st, 2015 | Release Date | Jun 20th, 2016 |
Core i3 | Collection | Xeon E5 |
Skylake | Codename | Broadwell-E/EP |
Intel Socket 1151 | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 4 |
4 | Threads | 8 |
3.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.8 GHz |
51 W | TDP | 140 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
37.0x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
Intel HD 530 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | No |