In Deathloop, the Core i3-4150T is slightly slower than the Xeon X3440. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i3-4150T
- Is 4 years and 7 months newer – May 01, 2014 vs Sep 08, 2009
- Is 4 years and 7 months newer
- Consumes up to 63% less energy – 35 vs 95 Watts
- Consumes up to 63% 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 X3440
- Up to 2% faster in Deathloop – 223 vs 219 FPS
- Up to 2% faster in Deathloop
Deathloop FPS Calculator
Core i3-4150T vs Xeon X3440: Comparison of performance and price
Core i3-4150T
May 1st, 2014
Average FPS
219 FPS
98%
Min 1% FPS
164 FPS
98%
Price, $
$26.99
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.12/FPS
100%
All items are out of stock
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i3-4150T vs Xeon X3440 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i3-4150T vs Xeon X3440 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i3-4150T
May 1st, 2014
Cores
2-core
50%
L3 Cache
3 MB
38%
Base Frequency
2.9 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Xeon X3440
Sep 8th, 2009
Cores
4-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.533 GHz
87%
Turbo Frequency
2.933 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1333 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i3-4150T May 1st, 2014 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Xeon X3440 Sep 8th, 2009 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
May 1st, 2014 | Released | Sep 8th, 2009 |
| – | MSRP | $215.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Server |
| LGA1150 | Socket | LGA1156 |
35 W | Power Consumption | 95 W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 1333 MHz (DDR3) |
Intel HD 4400 | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
