Key Differences
In short — Core i9-14900KF outperforms the cheaper Xeon E5-1620 v4 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Xeon E5-1620 v4 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i9-14900KF is 2675 days newer than the cheaper Xeon E5-1620 v4.
Advantages of Xeon E5-1620 v4
- Up to 44% cheaper than Core i9-14900KF - $232.12 vs $417.61
- Up to 23% better value when playing World of Warcraft than Core i9-14900KF - $1.34 vs $1.74 per FPS
Advantages of Core i9-14900KF
- Performs up to 39% better in World of Warcraft than Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 240 vs 173 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 32 vs 8 threads
World of Warcraft
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Maximum
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
FPS
173
72%
Value, $/FPS
$1.34/FPS
100%
Price, $
$232.12
100%
Value Winner
Buy for $232.12 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 140 minutes ago
Desktop • Oct 17th, 2023
FPS
240
100%
Value, $/FPS
$1.74/FPS
77%
Price, $
$417.61
55%
FPS Winner
Buy for $417.61 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 138 minutes ago
My Games
With selected game settings
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Maximum
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Desktop • Oct 17th, 2023
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Xeon E5-1620 v4 | vs | Core i9-14900KF |
---|---|---|
Jun 20th, 2016 | Release Date | Oct 17th, 2023 |
Xeon E5 | Collection | Core i9 |
Broadwell-E/EP | Codename | Raptor Lake |
Intel Socket 2011-3 | Socket | Intel Socket 1700 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 24 |
8 | Threads | 32 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.2 GHz |
3.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 6.0 GHz |
140 W | TDP | Not Available |
14 nm | Process Size | 10 nm |
35.0x | Multiplier | 32.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |