Key Differences
In short — Ryzen Threadripper 1920X outperforms Xeon E5-2640 v3 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Ryzen Threadripper 1920X is 1067 days newer than Xeon E5-2640 v3.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-2640 v3
- Consumes up to 50% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X - 90 vs 180 Watts
Advantages of AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X
- Performs up to 1% better in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt than Xeon E5-2640 v3 - 164 vs 162 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Xeon E5-2640 v3 - 24 vs 16 threads
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra+
Desktop • Aug 10th, 2017
FPS
164
100%
Value, $/FPS
$1.65/FPS
100%
Price, $
$270
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for $270 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 4856 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra+
Server/Workstation • Sep 8th, 2014
Desktop • Aug 10th, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-2640 v3 | vs | AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X |
---|---|---|
Sep 8th, 2014 | Release Date | Aug 10th, 2017 |
Xeon E5 | Collection | Ryzen Threadripper |
Haswell-E/EP, Sandy Bridge-EP/EX | Codename | Whitehaven |
Intel Socket 2011-3 | Socket | AMD Socket SP3r2 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 12 |
16 | Threads | 24 |
2.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
3.4 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.0 GHz |
90 W | TDP | 180 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
26.0x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |