Key Differences
In short — Core i9-10900F outperforms Xeon W3520 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i9-10900F is 4049 days newer than Xeon W3520.
Advantages of Intel Core i9-10900F
- Performs up to 17% better in Assassin's Creed Odyssey than Xeon W3520 - 136 vs 116 FPS
- Consumes up to 50% less energy than Intel Xeon W3520 - 65 vs 130 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Xeon W3520 - 20 vs 8 threads
Assassin's Creed Odyssey
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
136
100%
Value, £/FPS
£1.86/FPS
100%
Price, £
£253.01
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for £253.01 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 9 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Server/Workstation • Mar 30th, 2009
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon W3520 | vs | Intel Core i9-10900F |
---|---|---|
Mar 30th, 2009 | Release Date | Apr 30th, 2020 |
Xeon | Collection | Core i9 |
Bloomfield | Codename | Comet Lake |
Intel Socket 1366 | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 10 |
8 | Threads | 20 |
2.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.8 GHz |
2.9 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.2 GHz |
130 W | TDP | 65 W |
45 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
20.0x | Multiplier | 28.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | No |