Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-2650 v3 outperforms Core i7-940XM on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Xeon E5-2650 v3 is 1541 days newer than Core i7-940XM.
Advantages of Intel Core i7-940XM
- Consumes up to 48% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3 - 55 vs 105 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3
- Performs up to 1% better in Monster Hunter: World than Core i7-940XM - 252 vs 250 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i7-940XM - 20 vs 8 threads
Monster Hunter: World
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Highest
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Highest
Core i7-940XM
Mobile • Jun 20th, 2010
Xeon E5-2650 v3
Server/Workstation • Sep 8th, 2014
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i7-940XM | vs | Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3 |
|---|---|---|
| Jun 20th, 2010 | Release Date | Sep 8th, 2014 |
| Core i7 Extreme | Collection | Xeon E5 |
| Clarksfield | Codename | Haswell |
| Intel Socket G1 | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Mobile | Segment | Server |
| 4 | Cores | 10 |
| 8 | Threads | 20 |
| 2.1 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.3 GHz |
3.3 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.0 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 105 W |
| 45 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
| 16.0x | Multiplier | 23.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | No |
