In Rust, the Core i3-7100T is slightly faster than the Xeon E5645. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i3-7100T
- Up to 3% faster in Rust – 217 vs 210 FPS
- Up to 3% faster in Rust
- Is 6 years and 9 months newer – Jan 03, 2017 vs Mar 16, 2010
- Is 6 years and 9 months newer
- Consumes up to 56% less energy – 35 vs 80 Watts
- Consumes up to 56% 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 E5645
No clear advantages
Rust FPS Calculator
Core i3-7100T vs Xeon E5645: Comparison of performance and price
Core i3-7100T
Jan 3rd, 2017
Average FPS
217 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
48 FPS
100%
Price, $
$25
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.11/FPS
100%
All items are out of stock
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i3-7100T vs Xeon E5645 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i3-7100T vs Xeon E5645 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i3-7100T
Jan 3rd, 2017
Cores
2-core
33%
L3 Cache
3 MB
25%
Base Frequency
3.4 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2400 MHz
100%
Xeon E5645
Mar 16th, 2010
Cores
6-core
100%
L3 Cache
12 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.4 GHz
71%
Turbo Frequency
2.666 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i3-7100T Jan 3rd, 2017 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Xeon E5645 Mar 16th, 2010 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Jan 3rd, 2017 | Released | Mar 16th, 2010 |
| – | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Server |
| LGA1151 | Socket | LGA1366 |
35 W | Power Consumption | 80 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 2400 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | DDR3 |
Intel HD 630 | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
