Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-1620 v4 outperforms the cheaper Ryzen 3 2200G on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Ryzen 3 2200G is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Xeon E5-1620 v4 is 602 days older than the cheaper Ryzen 3 2200G.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4
- Performs up to 1% better in Far Cry 5 than Ryzen 3 2200G - 200 vs 198 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD Ryzen 3 2200G - 8 vs 4 threads
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 3 2200G
- Up to 5% cheaper than Xeon E5-1620 v4 - $130.0 vs $136.62
- Up to 3% better value when playing Far Cry 5 than Xeon E5-1620 v4 - $0.66 vs $0.68 per FPS
- Consumes up to 54% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 65 vs 140 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 doesn't have integrated graphics
Far Cry 5
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
FPS
200
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.68/FPS
97%
Price, $
$136.62
95%
FPS Winner
Buy for $136.62 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 83 minutes ago
Desktop • Feb 12th, 2018
FPS
198
99%
Value, $/FPS
$0.66/FPS
100%
Price, $
$130
100%
Value Winner
Buy for $130 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 83 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Desktop • Feb 12th, 2018
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 | vs | AMD Ryzen 3 2200G |
---|---|---|
Jun 20th, 2016 | Release Date | Feb 12th, 2018 |
Xeon E5 | Collection | Ryzen 3 |
Broadwell-E/EP | Codename | Raven Ridge |
Intel Socket 2011-3 | Socket | AMD Socket AM4 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 4 |
8 | Threads | 4 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
3.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.7 GHz |
140 W | TDP | 65 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
35.0x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Radeon Vega 8 |
No | Overclockable | Yes |