In Atomfall, the Core i5-2500K is slightly faster than the Xeon E5620. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i5-2500K
- Up to 2% faster in Atomfall – 192 vs 189 FPS
- Up to 2% faster in Atomfall
- Is 9 months and 25 days newer – Jan 09, 2011 vs Mar 16, 2010
- Is 9 months and 25 days newer
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
Xeon E5620
- Consumes up to 16% less energy – 80 vs 95 Watts
- Consumes up to 16% less energy
Atomfall FPS Calculator
Core i5-2500K vs Xeon E5620: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i5-2500K vs Xeon E5620 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i5-2500K vs Xeon E5620 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i5-2500K
Jan 9th, 2011
Cores
4-core
100%
L3 Cache
6 MB
50%
Base Frequency
3.3 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.7 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1600 MHz
100%
Xeon E5620
Mar 16th, 2010
Cores
4-core
100%
L3 Cache
12 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.4 GHz
73%
Turbo Frequency
2.666 GHz
72%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i5-2500K Jan 9th, 2011 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Xeon E5620 Mar 16th, 2010 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Jan 9th, 2011 | Release Date | Mar 16th, 2010 |
| $216.00 | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Server |
| LGA1155 | Socket | LGA1366 |
| 95W | Power Consumption | 80W |
| Other Features | ||
| 1600 MHz (DDR3) | RAM | DDR3 |
Intel HD 3000 | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
