Key Differences
In short — Core i5-11600KF outperforms the cheaper Xeon E5-1620 v4 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Xeon E5-1620 v4 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i5-11600KF is 1730 days newer than the cheaper Xeon E5-1620 v4.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4
- Up to 18% cheaper than Core i5-11600KF - $136.62 vs $165.86
- Up to 4% better value when playing Far Cry 5 than Core i5-11600KF - $0.68 vs $0.71 per FPS
Advantages of Intel Core i5-11600KF
- Performs up to 16% better in Far Cry 5 than Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 232 vs 200 FPS
- Consumes up to 11% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 125 vs 140 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 12 vs 8 threads
Far Cry 5
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
FPS
200
86%
Value, $/FPS
$0.68/FPS
100%
Price, $
$136.62
100%
Value Winner
Buy for $136.62 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 7777 minutes ago
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
FPS
232
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.71/FPS
95%
Price, $
$165.86
82%
FPS Winner
Buy for $165.86 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 7776 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 | vs | Intel Core i5-11600KF |
---|---|---|
Jun 20th, 2016 | Release Date | Mar 16th, 2021 |
Xeon E5 | Collection | Core i5 |
Broadwell-E/EP | Codename | Rocket Lake |
Intel Socket 2011-3 | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 6 |
8 | Threads | 12 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.9 GHz |
3.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.9 GHz |
140 W | TDP | 125 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
35.0x | Multiplier | 39.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |