Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-1620 v4 outperforms the cheaper FX-8300 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing FX-8300 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Xeon E5-1620 v4 is 1336 days newer than the cheaper FX-8300.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4
- Performs up to 9% better in Resident Evil 4 than FX-8300 - 170 vs 156 FPS
Advantages of AMD FX-8300
- Up to 18% cheaper than Xeon E5-1620 v4 - $112.02 vs $136.62
- Up to 10% better value when playing Resident Evil 4 than Xeon E5-1620 v4 - $0.72 vs $0.8 per FPS
- Consumes up to 32% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 95 vs 140 Watts
Resident Evil 4
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Max
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
FPS
170
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.8/FPS
89%
Price, $
$136.62
81%
FPS Winner
Buy for $136.62 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 6593 minutes ago
Buy for $112.02 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 6592 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Max
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 | vs | AMD FX-8300 |
---|---|---|
Jun 20th, 2016 | Release Date | Oct 23rd, 2012 |
Xeon E5 | Collection | FX |
Broadwell-E/EP | Codename | Vishera |
Intel Socket 2011-3 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 8 |
8 | Threads | 8 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.3 GHz |
3.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.2 GHz |
140 W | TDP | 95 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
35.0x | Multiplier | 16.5x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |