In The Callisto Protocol, the Xeon E5-1620 v3 is slightly slower than the Core i9-9900T. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Xeon E5-1620 v3
No clear advantages
Core i9-9900T
- Up to 9% faster in The Callisto Protocol – 126 vs 116 FPS
- Up to 9% faster in The Callisto Protocol
- Is 4 years and 7 months newer – Apr 23, 2019 vs Sep 08, 2014
- Is 4 years and 7 months newer
- Consumes up to 75% less energy – 35 vs 140 Watts
- Consumes up to 75% less energy
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
The Callisto Protocol FPS Calculator
Xeon E5-1620 v3 vs Core i9-9900T: Comparison of performance and price
Xeon E5-1620 v3
Sep 8th, 2014
Average FPS
116 FPS
92%
Min 1% FPS
83 FPS
91%
Price, $
$189.95
100%
Value, $/FPS
$1.63/FPS
100%
All items are out of stock
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Xeon E5-1620 v3 vs Core i9-9900T in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Xeon E5-1620 v3 vs Core i9-9900T in core CPU performance specifications
Xeon E5-1620 v3
Sep 8th, 2014
Cores
4-core
50%
L3 Cache
10 MB
62%
Base Frequency
3.5 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.6 GHz
82%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2133 MHz
80%
Core i9-9900T
Apr 23rd, 2019
Cores
8-core
100%
L3 Cache
16 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.1 GHz
60%
Turbo Frequency
4.4 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2666 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Xeon E5-1620 v3 Sep 8th, 2014 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i9-9900T Apr 23rd, 2019 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Sep 8th, 2014 | Released | Apr 23rd, 2019 |
| – | MSRP | $423.00 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA2011-3 | Socket | LGA1151 |
| 140 W | Power Consumption | 35 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 2133 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | 2666 MHz (DDR4) |
| No Integrated Graphics | Integrated GPU | UHD Graphics 630 |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
