Key Differences
In short — Core i3-4370 outperforms Xeon E5-1620 v4 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i3-4370 is 700 days older than Xeon E5-1620 v4.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i3-4370 - 8 vs 4 threads
Advantages of Intel Core i3-4370
- Performs up to 2% better in Total War: WARHAMMER III than Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 170 vs 167 FPS
- 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
Total War: WARHAMMER III
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 i3-4370
Desktop • Jul 21st, 2014
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 | vs | Intel Core i3-4370 |
|---|---|---|
Jun 20th, 2016 | Release Date | Jul 21st, 2014 |
| 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 | 3.8 GHz |
| 3.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
| 140 W | TDP | 54 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
| 35.0x | Multiplier | 38.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 4600 |
| No | Overclockable | No |
