Key Differences
In short — Core i5-9400 outperforms Xeon E5-1620 v3 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i5-9400 is 1502 days newer than Xeon E5-1620 v3.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i5-9400 - 8 vs 6 threads
Advantages of Intel Core i5-9400
- Performs up to 5% better in Shadow of the Tomb Raider: Definitive Edition than Xeon E5-1620 v3 - 205 vs 196 FPS
- Consumes up to 54% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 - 65 vs 140 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 doesn't have integrated graphics
Shadow of the Tomb Raider: Definitive Edition
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Highest
Desktop • Oct 19th, 2018
FPS
205
100%
Value, £/FPS
£0.53/FPS
100%
Price, £
£108.89
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for £108.89 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 75 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Highest
Server/Workstation • Sep 8th, 2014
Desktop • Oct 19th, 2018
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 | vs | Intel Core i5-9400 |
---|---|---|
Sep 8th, 2014 | Release Date | Oct 19th, 2018 |
Xeon E5 | Collection | Core i5 |
Haswell-E/EP | Codename | Coffee Lake |
Intel Socket 2011-3 | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 6 |
8 | Threads | 6 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.9 GHz |
3.6 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.1 GHz |
140 W | TDP | 65 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
35.0x | Multiplier | 29.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | UHD 630 |
No | Overclockable | No |