In Deathloop, the Xeon E5-1620 v2 is slightly slower than the Xeon E5649. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Xeon E5-1620 v2
- Is 2 years and 6 months newer – Sep 10, 2013 vs Feb 14, 2011
- Is 2 years and 6 months newer
Xeon E5649
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop – 222 vs 219 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop
- Consumes up to 38% less energy – 80 vs 130 Watts
- Consumes up to 38% less energy
Deathloop FPS Calculator
Xeon E5-1620 v2 vs Xeon E5649: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
All items are out of stock
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Xeon E5-1620 v2 vs Xeon E5649 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Xeon E5-1620 v2 vs Xeon E5649 in core CPU performance specifications
Xeon E5-1620 v2
Sep 10th, 2013
Cores
4-core
67%
L3 Cache
10 MB
83%
Base Frequency
3.7 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.9 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1866 MHz
100%
Xeon E5649
Feb 14th, 2011
Cores
6-core
100%
L3 Cache
12 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.533 GHz
68%
Turbo Frequency
2.8 GHz
72%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Xeon E5-1620 v2 Sep 10th, 2013 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Xeon E5649 Feb 14th, 2011 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Sep 10th, 2013 | Release Date | Feb 14th, 2011 |
| – | MSRP | – |
Server | Segment | Server |
| LGA2011 | Socket | LGA1366 |
| 130W | Power Consumption | 80W |
| Other Features | ||
| 1866 MHz (DDR3) | RAM | DDR3 |
| No Integrated Graphics | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
