Key Differences
In short — Core i5-10600KF 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 Core i5-10600KF is 1410 days newer than the cheaper Xeon E5-1620 v4.
Advantages of Intel Core i5-10600KF
- Performs up to 6% better in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt than Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 172 vs 163 FPS
- Consumes up to 11% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 125 vs 140 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 12 vs 8 threads
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4
- Up to 58% cheaper than Core i5-10600KF - £49.95 vs £119.95
- Up to 56% better value when playing The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt than Core i5-10600KF - £0.31 vs £0.7 per FPS
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra+
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
172
100%
Value, £/FPS
£0.7/FPS
44%
Price, £
£119.95
41%
FPS Winner
Buy for £119.95 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 9679 minutes ago
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
FPS
163
94%
Value, £/FPS
£0.31/FPS
100%
Price, £
£49.95
100%
Value Winner
Buy for £49.95 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 9467 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra+
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i5-10600KF | vs | Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 |
---|---|---|
Apr 30th, 2020 | Release Date | Jun 20th, 2016 |
Core i5 | Collection | Xeon E5 |
Comet Lake | Codename | Broadwell-E/EP |
Intel Socket 1200 | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 4 |
12 | Threads | 8 |
4.1 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
4.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.8 GHz |
125 W | TDP | 140 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
41.0x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | No |