Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-2620 v3 outperforms Core i7-3630QM on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Xeon E5-2620 v3 is 708 days newer than Core i7-3630QM.
Advantages of Intel Core i7-3630QM
- Consumes up to 47% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 - 45 vs 85 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3
- Performs up to 5% better in Dying Light 2: Stay Human than Core i7-3630QM - 123 vs 117 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i7-3630QM - 12 vs 8 threads
Dying Light 2: Stay Human
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Core i7-3630QM
Mobile • Sep 30th, 2012
Xeon E5-2620 v3
Server/Workstation • Sep 8th, 2014
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i7-3630QM | vs | Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 30th, 2012 | Release Date | Sep 8th, 2014 |
| Core i7 | Collection | Xeon E5 |
| Ivy Bridge | Codename | Haswell-E |
| Intel Socket G2 (988B) | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Mobile | Segment | Server |
| 4 | Cores | 6 |
| 8 | Threads | 12 |
| 2.4 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.4 GHz |
3.4 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.2 GHz |
45 W | TDP | 85 W |
| 22 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
| 24.0x | Multiplier | 24.0x |
Intel HD 4000 | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | No |
