Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 9 7900X3D 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 Ryzen 9 7900X3D is 2389 days newer than the cheaper Xeon E5-1620 v4.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4
- Up to 87% cheaper than Ryzen 9 7900X3D - £49.95 vs £390.92
- Up to 84% better value when playing Sea of Thieves than Ryzen 9 7900X3D - £0.22 vs £1.4 per FPS
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 9 7900X3D
- Performs up to 24% better in Sea of Thieves than Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 279 vs 225 FPS
- Consumes up to 14% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 120 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
Sea of Thieves
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Mythical
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
FPS
225
80%
Value, £/FPS
£0.22/FPS
100%
Price, £
£49.95
100%
Value Winner
Buy for £49.95 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 387 minutes ago
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2023
FPS
279
100%
Value, £/FPS
£1.4/FPS
15%
Price, £
£390.92
12%
FPS Winner
Buy for £390.92 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 616 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Mythical
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2023
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 | vs | AMD Ryzen 9 7900X3D |
---|---|---|
Jun 20th, 2016 | Release Date | Jan 4th, 2023 |
Xeon E5 | Collection | Ryzen 9 |
Broadwell-E/EP | Codename | Raphael |
Intel Socket 2011-3 | Socket | AMD Socket AM5 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 12 |
8 | Threads | 24 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 4.4 GHz |
3.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.6 GHz |
140 W | TDP | 120 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 5 nm |
35.0x | Multiplier | 44.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Radeon Graphics |
No | Overclockable | Yes |