Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 9 5950X outperforms the cheaper Xeon E5-1620 v4 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Xeon E5-1620 v4 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Ryzen 9 5950X is 1599 days newer than the cheaper Xeon E5-1620 v4.
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 9 5950X
- Performs up to 10% better in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt than Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 180 vs 163 FPS
- Consumes up to 25% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 105 vs 140 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 32 vs 8 threads
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4
- Up to 63% cheaper than Ryzen 9 5950X - $136.62 vs $369.0
- Up to 59% better value when playing The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt than Ryzen 9 5950X - $0.84 vs $2.05 per FPS
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra+
Buy for $369 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 0 minutes ago
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
FPS
163
90%
Value, $/FPS
$0.84/FPS
100%
Price, $
$136.62
100%
Value Winner
Buy for $136.62 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 1 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra+
Desktop • Nov 5th, 2020
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD Ryzen 9 5950X | vs | Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 |
---|---|---|
Nov 5th, 2020 | Release Date | Jun 20th, 2016 |
Ryzen 9 | Collection | Xeon E5 |
Vermeer | Codename | Broadwell-E/EP |
AMD Socket AM4 | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
16 | Cores | 4 |
32 | Threads | 8 |
3.4 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
4.9 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.8 GHz |
105 W | TDP | 140 W |
7 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
34.0x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | No |