In Deathloop, the Core i3-10105 is slightly slower than the Xeon E5520. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i3-10105
- Is 11 years and 11 months newer – Mar 16, 2021 vs Mar 30, 2009
- Is 11 years and 11 months newer
- Consumes up to 19% less energy – 65 vs 80 Watts
- Consumes up to 19% 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 E5520
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop – 223 vs 220 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop
Deathloop FPS Calculator
Core i3-10105 vs Xeon E5520: Comparison of performance and price
Core i3-10105
Mar 16th, 2021
Average FPS
220 FPS
99%
Min 1% FPS
165 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 E5520 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i3-10105 vs Xeon E5520 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i3-10105
Mar 16th, 2021
Cores
4-core
100%
L3 Cache
6 MB
75%
Base Frequency
3.7 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4.4 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2666 MHz
100%
Xeon E5520
Mar 30th, 2009
Cores
4-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.266 GHz
61%
Turbo Frequency
2.533 GHz
58%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i3-10105 Mar 16th, 2021 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Xeon E5520 Mar 30th, 2009 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Mar 16th, 2021 | Released | Mar 30th, 2009 |
| $122.00 | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Server |
| LGA1200 | Socket | LGA1366 |
65 W | Power Consumption | 80 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 2666 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | DDR3 |
UHD Graphics 630 | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
