Key Differences
In short — Core i7-11700F 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 Core i7-11700F is 1730 days newer than the cheaper Xeon E5-1620 v4.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4
- Up to 81% cheaper than Core i7-11700F - £49.95 vs £261.16
- Up to 79% better value when playing World of Tanks than Core i7-11700F - £0.1 vs £0.47 per FPS
Advantages of Intel Core i7-11700F
- Performs up to 7% better in World of Tanks than Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 558 vs 523 FPS
- Consumes up to 54% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 65 vs 140 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 16 vs 8 threads
World of Tanks
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
FPS
523
93%
Value, £/FPS
£0.1/FPS
100%
Price, £
£49.95
100%
Value Winner
Buy for £49.95 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 43 minutes ago
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
FPS
558
100%
Value, £/FPS
£0.47/FPS
21%
Price, £
£261.16
19%
FPS Winner
Buy for £261.16 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 43 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 | vs | Intel Core i7-11700F |
---|---|---|
Jun 20th, 2016 | Release Date | Mar 16th, 2021 |
Xeon E5 | Collection | Core i7 |
Broadwell-E/EP | Codename | Rocket Lake |
Intel Socket 2011-3 | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 8 |
8 | Threads | 16 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.5 GHz |
3.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.9 GHz |
140 W | TDP | 65 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
35.0x | Multiplier | 25.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | No |