Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-1620 v4 outperforms the cheaper Core i7-3770 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Core i7-3770 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Xeon E5-1620 v4 is 1513 days newer than the cheaper Core i7-3770.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4
- Performs up to 4% better in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt than Core i7-3770 - 163 vs 157 FPS
Advantages of Intel Core i7-3770
- Up to 11% cheaper than Xeon E5-1620 v4 - $122.03 vs $136.62
- Up to 7% better value when playing The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt than Xeon E5-1620 v4 - $0.78 vs $0.84 per FPS
- Consumes up to 45% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 77 vs 140 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 doesn't have integrated graphics
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra+
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
FPS
163
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.84/FPS
92%
Price, $
$136.62
89%
FPS Winner
Buy for $136.62 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 6632 minutes ago
Desktop • Apr 29th, 2012
FPS
157
96%
Value, $/FPS
$0.78/FPS
100%
Price, $
$122.03
100%
Value Winner
Buy for $122.03 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 6631 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra+
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Desktop • Apr 29th, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 | vs | Intel Core i7-3770 |
---|---|---|
Jun 20th, 2016 | Release Date | Apr 29th, 2012 |
Xeon E5 | Collection | Core i7 |
Broadwell-E/EP | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
Intel Socket 2011-3 | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 4 |
8 | Threads | 8 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.4 GHz |
3.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.9 GHz |
140 W | TDP | 77 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
35.0x | Multiplier | 34.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 4000 |
No | Overclockable | No |