Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-2670 v3 outperforms Core i7-920XM on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Xeon E5-2670 v3 is 1811 days newer than Core i7-920XM.
Advantages of Intel Core i7-920XM
- Consumes up to 54% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-2670 v3 - 55 vs 120 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-2670 v3 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-2670 v3
- Performs up to 9% better in Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 than Core i7-920XM - 98 vs 90 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i7-920XM - 24 vs 8 threads
Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Core i7-920XM
Mobile • Sep 23rd, 2009
Xeon E5-2670 v3
Server/Workstation • Sep 8th, 2014
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i7-920XM | vs | Intel Xeon E5-2670 v3 |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 23rd, 2009 | Release Date | Sep 8th, 2014 |
| Core i7 Extreme | Collection | Xeon E5 |
| Clarksfield | Codename | Gainestown, Haswell-E/EP, Sandy Bridge-EP/EX |
| Intel Socket G1 | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Mobile | Segment | Server |
| 4 | Cores | 12 |
| 8 | Threads | 24 |
| 2.0 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.3 GHz |
3.2 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.1 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 120 W |
| 45 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
| 15.0x | Multiplier | 23.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | No |
