Key Differences
In short — Core i9-9900 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 i9-9900 is 1688 days newer than Xeon E5-1620 v3.
Advantages of Intel Core i9-9900
- Performs up to 3% better in Red Dead Redemption 2 than Xeon E5-1620 v3 - 160 vs 156 FPS
- Consumes up to 54% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 - 65 vs 140 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 - 16 vs 8 threads
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 doesn't have integrated graphics
Red Dead Redemption 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Highest
Desktop • Apr 23rd, 2019
FPS
160
100%
Value, £/FPS
£3.49/FPS
100%
Price, £
£558.88
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for £558.88 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 80 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Highest
Server/Workstation • Sep 8th, 2014
Desktop • Apr 23rd, 2019
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 | vs | Intel Core i9-9900 |
---|---|---|
Sep 8th, 2014 | Release Date | Apr 23rd, 2019 |
Xeon E5 | Collection | Core i9 |
Haswell-E/EP | Codename | Coffee Lake |
Intel Socket 2011-3 | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 8 |
8 | Threads | 16 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.1 GHz |
3.6 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.0 GHz |
140 W | TDP | 65 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
35.0x | Multiplier | 31.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 630 |
No | Overclockable | No |