Key Differences
In short — EPYC 7551P outperforms Xeon E5-1620 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing EPYC 7551P is 1941 days newer than Xeon E5-1620.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620
- Consumes up to 28% less energy than AMD EPYC 7551P - 130 vs 180 Watts
Advantages of AMD EPYC 7551P
- Performs up to 8% better in Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Siege than Xeon E5-1620 - 496 vs 461 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Xeon E5-1620 - 64 vs 8 threads
Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Siege
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Xeon E5-1620
Server/Workstation • Mar 6th, 2012
EPYC 7551P
Server/Workstation • Jun 29th, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-1620 | vs | AMD EPYC 7551P |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 6th, 2012 | Release Date | Jun 29th, 2017 |
| Xeon E5 | Collection | EPYC |
| Sandy Bridge-EP | Codename | Naples |
| Intel Socket 2011 | Socket | AMD Socket SP3 |
Server | Segment | Server |
| 4 | Cores | 32 |
| 8 | Threads | 64 |
3.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.0 GHz |
3.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.0 GHz |
130 W | TDP | 180 W |
| 32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
36.0x | Multiplier | 20.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | Yes |
