Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-1620 v4 outperforms the cheaper Phenom X4 9650 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Phenom X4 9650 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Xeon E5-1620 v4 is 3007 days newer than the cheaper Phenom X4 9650.
Advantages of AMD Phenom X4 9650
- Up to 83% cheaper than Xeon E5-1620 v4 - $39.99 vs $232.12
- Up to 81% better value when playing Horizon Zero Dawn than Xeon E5-1620 v4 - $0.27 vs $1.39 per FPS
- Consumes up to 32% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 95 vs 140 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4
- Performs up to 14% better in Horizon Zero Dawn than Phenom X4 9650 - 167 vs 146 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD Phenom X4 9650 - 8 vs 4 threads
Horizon Zero Dawn
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultimate
Desktop • Mar 27th, 2008
FPS
146
87.42514970059881%
Value, $/FPS
$0.27/FPS
100%
Price, $
$39.99
100%
Value Winner
Buy for $39.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 1823 minutes ago
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
FPS
167
100%
Value, $/FPS
$1.39/FPS
19.424460431654676%
Price, $
$232.12
17%
FPS Winner
Buy for $232.12 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 1828 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultimate
Desktop • Mar 27th, 2008
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD Phenom X4 9650 | vs | Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 |
---|---|---|
Mar 27th, 2008 | Release Date | Jun 20th, 2016 |
Phenom X4 | Collection | Xeon E5 |
Agena | Codename | Broadwell-E/EP |
AMD Socket AM2+ | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 4 |
4 | Threads | 8 |
2.3 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.8 GHz |
95 W | TDP | 140 W |
65 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
11.5x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | No |