Key Differences
In short — Core i9-12900K 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 i9-12900K is 1963 days newer than the cheaper Xeon E5-1620 v4.
Advantages of Intel Core i9-12900K
- Performs up to 11% better in ARK: Survival Evolved than Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 133 vs 120 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 - 24 vs 8 threads
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4
- Up to 87% cheaper than Core i9-12900K - £49.95 vs £389.99
- Up to 86% better value when playing ARK: Survival Evolved than Core i9-12900K - £0.42 vs £2.93 per FPS
ARK: Survival Evolved
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Desktop • Nov 4th, 2021
FPS
133
100%
Value, £/FPS
£2.93/FPS
14%
Price, £
£389.99
12%
FPS Winner
Buy for £389.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 8193 minutes ago
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
FPS
120
90%
Value, £/FPS
£0.42/FPS
100%
Price, £
£49.95
100%
Value Winner
Buy for £49.95 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 7981 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Desktop • Nov 4th, 2021
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i9-12900K | vs | Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 |
---|---|---|
Nov 4th, 2021 | Release Date | Jun 20th, 2016 |
Core i9 | Collection | Xeon E5 |
Alder Lake | Codename | Broadwell-E/EP |
Intel Socket 1700 | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
16 | Cores | 4 |
24 | Threads | 8 |
3.2 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
5.2 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.8 GHz |
125 W | TDP | 140 W |
10 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
32.0x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
UHD Graphics 770 | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | No |