In Deathloop, the Core i5-11600T is slightly faster than the Xeon E5645. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i5-11600T
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop – 224 vs 221 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop
- Is 11 years newer – Mar 16, 2021 vs Mar 16, 2010
- Is 11 years 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
Deathloop FPS Calculator
Core i5-11600T vs Xeon E5645: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
All items are out of stock
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i5-11600T vs Xeon E5645 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i5-11600T vs Xeon E5645 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i5-11600T
Mar 16th, 2021
Cores
6-core
100%
L3 Cache
12 MB
100%
Base Frequency
1.7 GHz
71%
Turbo Frequency
4.1 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
3200 MHz
100%
Xeon E5645
Mar 16th, 2010
Cores
6-core
100%
L3 Cache
12 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.4 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
2.666 GHz
65%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i5-11600T Mar 16th, 2021 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Xeon E5645 Mar 16th, 2010 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Mar 16th, 2021 | Release Date | Mar 16th, 2010 |
| $213.00 | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Server |
| LGA1200 | Socket | LGA1366 |
35W | Power Consumption | 80W |
| Other Features | ||
| 3200 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | DDR3 |
UHD Graphics 750 | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
