In Deathloop, the Core i3-10105 is slightly slower than the Xeon E5-2640. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i3-10105
- Is 9 years and 9 days newer – Mar 16, 2021 vs Mar 06, 2012
- Is 9 years and 9 days newer
- Consumes up to 32% less energy – 65 vs 95 Watts
- Consumes up to 32% less energy
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
Xeon E5-2640
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop – 221 vs 219 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop
Deathloop FPS Calculator
Core i3-10105 vs Xeon E5-2640: Comparison of performance and price
Core i3-10105
Mar 16th, 2021
Average FPS
219 FPS
99%
Min 1% FPS
164 FPS
99%
Price, $
$134.94
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.61/FPS
100%
All items are out of stock
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i3-10105 vs Xeon E5-2640 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i3-10105 vs Xeon E5-2640 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i3-10105
Mar 16th, 2021
Cores
4-core
67%
L3 Cache
6 MB
40%
Base Frequency
3.7 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4.4 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2666 MHz
100%
Xeon E5-2640
Mar 6th, 2012
Cores
6-core
100%
L3 Cache
15 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.5 GHz
68%
Turbo Frequency
3 GHz
68%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i3-10105 Mar 16th, 2021 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Xeon E5-2640 Mar 6th, 2012 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Mar 16th, 2021 | Release Date | Mar 6th, 2012 |
| $122.00 | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Server |
| LGA1200 | Socket | LGA2011 |
65W | Power Consumption | 95W |
| Other Features | ||
| 2666 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | DDR3 |
UHD Graphics 630 | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
