Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-1620 v4 outperforms Xeon E5-2640 v3 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 651 days newer than Xeon E5-2640 v3.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-2640 v3
- Consumes up to 36% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 90 vs 140 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 16 vs 8 threads
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4
- Performs up to 1% better in Red Dead Redemption 2 than Xeon E5-2640 v3 - 156 vs 155 FPS
Red Dead Redemption 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Highest
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
FPS
156
100%
Value, £/FPS
£0.32/FPS
100%
Price, £
£49.95
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for £49.95 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 196 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Highest
Server/Workstation • Sep 8th, 2014
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-2640 v3 | vs | Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 |
---|---|---|
Sep 8th, 2014 | Release Date | Jun 20th, 2016 |
Xeon E5 | Collection | Xeon E5 |
Haswell-E/EP, Sandy Bridge-EP/EX | Codename | Broadwell-E/EP |
Intel Socket 2011-3 | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 4 |
16 | Threads | 8 |
2.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
3.4 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.8 GHz |
90 W | TDP | 140 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
26.0x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | No |