Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-2620 v3 outperforms Core i7-4810MQ 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 231 days newer than Core i7-4810MQ.
Advantages of Intel Core i7-4810MQ
- Consumes up to 45% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 - 47 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 1% better in Assassin's Creed Valhalla than Core i7-4810MQ - 173 vs 172 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i7-4810MQ - 12 vs 8 threads
Assassin's Creed Valhalla
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Core i7-4810MQ
Mobile • Jan 20th, 2014
Xeon E5-2620 v3
Server/Workstation • Sep 8th, 2014
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i7-4810MQ | vs | Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 |
|---|---|---|
| Jan 20th, 2014 | Release Date | Sep 8th, 2014 |
| Core i7 | Collection | Xeon E5 |
| Haswell | Codename | Haswell-E |
| Intel Socket G3 | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Mobile | Segment | Server |
| 4 | Cores | 6 |
| 8 | Threads | 12 |
2.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.4 GHz |
3.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.2 GHz |
47 W | TDP | 85 W |
| 22 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
28.0x | Multiplier | 24.0x |
Intel HD 4600 | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | No |
