Key Differences
In short, we have a clear winner — Xeon E5-1620 v4 outperforms the more expensive FX-6350 on the selected game parameters, and is also a better bang for your buck! The better performing Xeon E5-1620 v4 is 1148 days newer than the more expensive FX-6350.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4
- Performs up to 4% better in God of War than FX-6350 - 170 vs 163 FPS
- Up to 6% cheaper than FX-6350 - £49.95 vs £52.95
- Up to 9% better value when playing God of War than FX-6350 - £0.29 vs £0.32 per FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-6350 - 8 vs 6 threads
Advantages of AMD FX-6350
- Consumes up to 11% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 125 vs 140 Watts
God of War
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
FPS
170
100%
Value, £/FPS
£0.29/FPS
100%
Price, £
£49.95
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for £49.95 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 12734 minutes ago
Buy for £52.95 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 12945 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Desktop • Apr 29th, 2013
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 | vs | AMD FX-6350 |
---|---|---|
Jun 20th, 2016 | Release Date | Apr 29th, 2013 |
Xeon E5 | Collection | FX |
Broadwell-E/EP | Codename | Vishera |
Intel Socket 2011-3 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 6 |
8 | Threads | 6 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.9 GHz |
3.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.2 GHz |
140 W | TDP | 125 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
35.0x | Multiplier | 19.5x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | No |