In Rust, the Core i5-9400T is slightly faster than the Xeon W3670. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i5-9400T
- Up to 5% faster in Rust – 219 vs 209 FPS
- Up to 5% faster in Rust
- Is 8 years and 3 days newer – Sep 01, 2018 vs Aug 29, 2010
- Is 8 years and 3 days 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 W3670
No clear advantages
Rust FPS Calculator
Core i5-9400T vs Xeon W3670: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
All items are out of stock
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i5-9400T vs Xeon W3670 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i5-9400T vs Xeon W3670 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i5-9400T
Sep 1st, 2018
Cores
6-core
100%
L3 Cache
9 MB
75%
Base Frequency
1.8 GHz
56%
Turbo Frequency
3.4 GHz
98%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2666 MHz
100%
Xeon W3670
Aug 29th, 2010
Cores
6-core
100%
L3 Cache
12 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.2 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.466 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i5-9400T Sep 1st, 2018 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Xeon W3670 Aug 29th, 2010 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Sep 1st, 2018 | Released | Aug 29th, 2010 |
| – | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Server |
| LGA1151 | Socket | LGA1366 |
35 W | Power Consumption | 130 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 2666 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | DDR3 |
UHD 630 | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
