Key Differences
In short — Core i3-4160T outperforms Xeon E5-2609 v2 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i3-4160T is 323 days newer than Xeon E5-2609 v2.
Advantages of Intel Core i3-4160T
- Performs up to 9% better in Total War: WARHAMMER III than Xeon E5-2609 v2 - 163 vs 149 FPS
- Consumes up to 56% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-2609 v2 - 35 vs 80 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-2609 v2 doesn't have integrated graphics
Total War: WARHAMMER III
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Xeon E5-2609 v2
Server/Workstation • Sep 1st, 2013
Core i3-4160T
Desktop • Jul 21st, 2014
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-2609 v2 | vs | Intel Core i3-4160T |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 1st, 2013 | Release Date | Jul 21st, 2014 |
| Xeon E5 | Collection | Core i3 |
| Ivy Bridge | Codename | Haswell |
| Intel Socket 2011 | Socket | Intel Socket 1150 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 2 |
| 4 | Threads | 4 |
| 2.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.1 GHz |
| 2.5 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
| 80 W | TDP | 35 W |
| 22 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
| 25.0x | Multiplier | 31.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 4400 |
| No | Overclockable | No |
