In Deathloop, the Core i7-9700T is slightly slower than the Xeon E5640. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i7-9700T
- Is 9 years and 1 month newer – Apr 23, 2019 vs Mar 16, 2010
- Is 9 years and 1 month 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 E5640
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop – 222 vs 220 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop
Deathloop FPS Calculator
Core i7-9700T vs Xeon E5640: Comparison of performance and price
Core i7-9700T
Apr 23rd, 2019
Average FPS
220 FPS
99%
Min 1% FPS
165 FPS
99%
Price, $
$394.28
100%
Value, $/FPS
$1.79/FPS
100%
All items are out of stock
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i7-9700T vs Xeon E5640 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i7-9700T vs Xeon E5640 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i7-9700T
Apr 23rd, 2019
Cores
8-core
100%
L3 Cache
12 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2 GHz
75%
Turbo Frequency
4.3 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2666 MHz
100%
Xeon E5640
Mar 16th, 2010
Cores
4-core
50%
L3 Cache
12 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.666 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
2.933 GHz
68%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i7-9700T Apr 23rd, 2019 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Xeon E5640 Mar 16th, 2010 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Apr 23rd, 2019 | Released | Mar 16th, 2010 |
| $323.00 | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Server |
| LGA1151 | Socket | LGA1366 |
35 W | Power Consumption | 80 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 2666 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | DDR3 |
UHD Graphics 630 | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
