Key Differences
In short — Core i9-13900K outperforms Xeon E5-1620 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i9-13900K is 3857 days newer than Xeon E5-1620.
Advantages of Intel Core i9-13900K
- Performs up to 31% better in Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Xeon E5-1620 - 222 vs 170 FPS
- Consumes up to 4% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 - 125 vs 130 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Xeon E5-1620 - 32 vs 8 threads
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-1620 doesn't have integrated graphics
Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Sep 27th, 2022
FPS
222
100%
Value, €/FPS
€2.76/FPS
100%
Price, €
€612.99
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for €612.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 294 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Server/Workstation • Mar 6th, 2012
Desktop • Sep 27th, 2022
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-1620 | vs | Intel Core i9-13900K |
---|---|---|
Mar 6th, 2012 | Release Date | Sep 27th, 2022 |
Xeon E5 | Collection | Core i9 |
Sandy Bridge-EP | Codename | Raptor Lake |
Intel Socket 2011 | Socket | Intel Socket 1700 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 24 |
8 | Threads | 32 |
3.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.0 GHz |
3.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.8 GHz |
130 W | TDP | 125 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 10 nm |
36.0x | Multiplier | 30.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 770 |
No | Overclockable | Yes |