Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-1620 v4 outperforms Core i3-4330 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Xeon E5-1620 v4 is 1023 days newer than Core i3-4330.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4
- Performs up to 1% better in Battlefield 2042 than Core i3-4330 - 156 vs 155 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i3-4330 - 8 vs 4 threads
Advantages of Intel Core i3-4330
- Consumes up to 61% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 54 vs 140 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 doesn't have integrated graphics
Battlefield 2042
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Xeon E5-1620 v4
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Core i3-4330
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2013
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Core i3-4330
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2013
Single-Core
1066
97.97794117647058%
Multi-Core
2144
55.002565418163165%
Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 | vs | Intel Core i3-4330 |
|---|---|---|
Jun 20th, 2016 | Release Date | Sep 1st, 2013 |
| Xeon E5 | Collection | Core i3 |
| Broadwell-E/EP | Codename | Haswell |
| Intel Socket 2011-3 | Socket | Intel Socket 1150 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 2 |
8 | Threads | 4 |
| 3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
| 3.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
| 140 W | TDP | 54 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
| 35.0x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 4600 |
| No | Overclockable | No |
