In Atomfall, the Core i3-6100 is slightly faster than the Xeon E5620. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i3-6100
- Up to 7% faster in Atomfall – 204 vs 190 FPS
- Up to 7% faster in Atomfall
- Is 5 years and 5 months newer – Sep 01, 2015 vs Mar 16, 2010
- Is 5 years and 5 months newer
- Consumes up to 36% less energy – 51 vs 80 Watts
- Consumes up to 36% 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 E5620
No clear advantages
Atomfall FPS Calculator
Core i3-6100 vs Xeon E5620: Comparison of performance and price
Core i3-6100
Sep 1st, 2015
Average FPS
204 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
153 FPS
100%
Price, $
$70.65
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.34/FPS
100%
All items are out of stock
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i3-6100 vs Xeon E5620 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i3-6100 vs Xeon E5620 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i3-6100
Sep 1st, 2015
Cores
2-core
50%
L3 Cache
4 MB
33%
Base Frequency
3.7 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2133 MHz
100%
Xeon E5620
Mar 16th, 2010
Cores
4-core
100%
L3 Cache
12 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.4 GHz
65%
Turbo Frequency
2.666 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i3-6100 Sep 1st, 2015 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Xeon E5620 Mar 16th, 2010 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Sep 1st, 2015 | Released | Mar 16th, 2010 |
| – | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Server |
| LGA1151 | Socket | LGA1366 |
51 W | Power Consumption | 80 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 2133 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | DDR3 |
Intel HD 530 | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
