In Deathloop, the Core i5-7400T is slightly slower than the Xeon L5630. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i5-7400T
- Is 6 years and 9 months newer – Jan 03, 2017 vs Mar 16, 2010
- Is 6 years and 9 months newer
- Consumes up to 12% less energy – 35 vs 40 Watts
- Consumes up to 12% 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 L5630
- Up to 2% faster in Deathloop – 223 vs 218 FPS
- Up to 2% faster in Deathloop
Deathloop FPS Calculator
Core i5-7400T vs Xeon L5630: Comparison of performance and price
Core i5-7400T
Jan 3rd, 2017
Average FPS
218 FPS
98%
Min 1% FPS
164 FPS
98%
Price, $
$78.02
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.35/FPS
100%
All items are out of stock
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i5-7400T vs Xeon L5630 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i5-7400T vs Xeon L5630 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i5-7400T
Jan 3rd, 2017
Cores
4-core
100%
L3 Cache
6 MB
50%
Base Frequency
2.4 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2400 MHz
100%
Xeon L5630
Mar 16th, 2010
Cores
4-core
100%
L3 Cache
12 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.133 GHz
89%
Turbo Frequency
2.4 GHz
80%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i5-7400T Jan 3rd, 2017 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Xeon L5630 Mar 16th, 2010 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Jan 3rd, 2017 | Released | Mar 16th, 2010 |
| – | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Server |
| LGA1151 | Socket | LGA1366 |
35 W | Power Consumption | 40 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 2400 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | DDR3 |
HD 630 | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
