In Atomfall, the Xeon E5-1620 v3 is slightly slower than the Core i5-12400F and it's also a worse value for money, as it's $10 more expensive!
Xeon E5-1620 v3
No clear advantages
Core i5-12400F
- Up to 12% faster in Atomfall – 228 vs 203 FPS
- Up to 12% faster in Atomfall
- Is 7 years and 3 months newer – Jan 04, 2022 vs Sep 08, 2014
- Is 7 years and 3 months newer
- Up to 5% cheaper – $179.99 vs $189.95
- Up to 5% cheaper
- Up to 16% better value in Atomfall – $0.78 vs $0.93/FPS
- Up to 16% better value in Atomfall
- Consumes up to 54% less energy – 65 vs 140 Watts
- Consumes up to 54% less energy
Atomfall FPS Calculator
Xeon E5-1620 v3 vs Core i5-12400F: Comparison of performance and price
Xeon E5-1620 v3
Sep 8th, 2014
Average FPS
203 FPS
89%
Min 1% FPS
152 FPS
89%
Price, $
$189.95
94%
Value, $/FPS
$0.93/FPS
84%
Core i5-12400F
Jan 4th, 2022
Average FPS
228 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
171 FPS
100%
Price, $
$179.99
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.78/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Xeon E5-1620 v3 vs Core i5-12400F in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Xeon E5-1620 v3 vs Core i5-12400F in core CPU performance specifications
Xeon E5-1620 v3
Sep 8th, 2014
Cores
4-core
67%
L3 Cache
10 MB
56%
Base Frequency
3.5 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.6 GHz
82%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2133 MHz
44%
Core i5-12400F
Jan 4th, 2022
Cores
6-core
100%
L3 Cache
18 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.5 GHz
71%
Turbo Frequency
4.4 GHz
100%
Max. DDR5 RAM Speed
4800 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Xeon E5-1620 v3 Sep 8th, 2014 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i5-12400F Jan 4th, 2022 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Sep 8th, 2014 | Released | Jan 4th, 2022 |
| – | MSRP | $174.00 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA2011-3 | Socket | LGA1700 |
| 140 W | Power Consumption | 65 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 2133 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | 3200 MHz (DDR4), 4800 MHz (DDR5) |
| No Integrated Graphics | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
