Key Differences
In short — Ryzen Threadripper 1900X outperforms Xeon E5-2640 v2 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Ryzen Threadripper 1900X is 1460 days newer than Xeon E5-2640 v2.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-2640 v2
- Consumes up to 47% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X - 95 vs 180 Watts
Advantages of AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X
- Performs up to 9% better in No Man's Sky than Xeon E5-2640 v2 - 170 vs 156 FPS
No Man's Sky
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Aug 31st, 2017
FPS
170
100%
Value, €/FPS
€2.23/FPS
100%
Price, €
€379.64
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for €379.64 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 111 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Server/Workstation • Sep 1st, 2013
Desktop • Aug 31st, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-2640 v2 | vs | AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X |
---|---|---|
Sep 1st, 2013 | Release Date | Aug 31st, 2017 |
Xeon E5 | Collection | Ryzen Threadripper |
Ivy Bridge EP | Codename | Whitehaven |
Intel Socket 2011 | Socket | AMD Socket SP3r2 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 8 |
16 | Threads | 16 |
2.0 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.8 GHz |
2.5 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.0 GHz |
95 W | TDP | 180 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
20.0x | Multiplier | 38.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |