Key Differences
In short — Core i7-8700K 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 i7-8700K is 472 days newer than the cheaper Xeon E5-1620 v4.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4
- Up to 76% cheaper than Core i7-8700K - £49.95 vs £208.88
- Up to 75% better value when playing Lost Ark than Core i7-8700K - £0.2 vs £0.79 per FPS
Advantages of Intel Core i7-8700K
- Performs up to 7% better in Lost Ark than Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 263 vs 245 FPS
- Consumes up to 32% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 95 vs 140 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 12 vs 8 threads
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 doesn't have integrated graphics
Lost Ark
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
FPS
245
93%
Value, £/FPS
£0.2/FPS
100%
Price, £
£49.95
100%
Value Winner
Buy for £49.95 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 3131 minutes ago
Buy for £208.88 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 3343 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Desktop • Oct 5th, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 | vs | Intel Core i7-8700K |
---|---|---|
Jun 20th, 2016 | Release Date | Oct 5th, 2017 |
Xeon E5 | Collection | Core i7 |
Broadwell-E/EP | Codename | Coffee Lake |
Intel Socket 2011-3 | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 6 |
8 | Threads | 12 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.7 GHz |
3.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.7 GHz |
140 W | TDP | 95 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
35.0x | Multiplier | 37.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 630 |
No | Overclockable | Yes |