In The Last of Us Part II, the Core i5-7400T is slightly slower than the Xeon E5-1620 v2. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i5-7400T
- Is 3 years and 3 months newer – Jan 03, 2017 vs Sep 10, 2013
- Is 3 years and 3 months newer
- Consumes up to 73% less energy – 35 vs 130 Watts
- Consumes up to 73% 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 E5-1620 v2
- Up to 4% faster in The Last of Us Part II – 188 vs 181 FPS
- Up to 4% faster in The Last of Us Part II
The Last of Us Part II FPS Calculator
Core i5-7400T vs Xeon E5-1620 v2: Comparison of performance and price
Core i5-7400T
Jan 3rd, 2017
Average FPS
181 FPS
96%
Min 1% FPS
136 FPS
96%
Price, $
$78.02
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.43/FPS
100%
All items are out of stock
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i5-7400T vs Xeon E5-1620 v2 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i5-7400T vs Xeon E5-1620 v2 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i5-7400T
Jan 3rd, 2017
Cores
4-core
100%
L3 Cache
6 MB
60%
Base Frequency
2.4 GHz
65%
Turbo Frequency
3 GHz
77%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2400 MHz
100%
Xeon E5-1620 v2
Sep 10th, 2013
Cores
4-core
100%
L3 Cache
10 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.7 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.9 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1866 MHz
78%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i5-7400T Jan 3rd, 2017 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Xeon E5-1620 v2 Sep 10th, 2013 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Jan 3rd, 2017 | Released | Sep 10th, 2013 |
| – | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Server |
| LGA1151 | Socket | LGA2011 |
35 W | Power Consumption | 130 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 2400 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | 1866 MHz (DDR3) |
HD 630 | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
