In Rust, the Xeon E5-1650 v2 is slightly slower than the Core i5-9400F and it's also a much worse value for money, as it's $110 more expensive!
Xeon E5-1650 v2
No clear advantages
Core i5-9400F
- Up to 6% faster in Rust – 226 vs 214 FPS
- Up to 6% faster in Rust
- Is 5 years and 3 months newer – Jan 08, 2019 vs Sep 10, 2013
- Is 5 years and 3 months newer
- Up to 48% cheaper – $119.99 vs $229.95
- Up to 48% cheaper
- Up to 50% better value in Rust – $0.53 vs $1.07/FPS
- Up to 50% better value in Rust
- Consumes up to 50% less energy – 65 vs 130 Watts
- Consumes up to 50% less energy
Rust FPS Calculator
Xeon E5-1650 v2 vs Core i5-9400F: Comparison of performance and price
Xeon E5-1650 v2
Sep 10th, 2013
Average FPS
214 FPS
95%
Min 1% FPS
45 FPS
82%
Price, $
$229.95
52%
Value, $/FPS
$1.07/FPS
50%
Core i5-9400F
Jan 8th, 2019
Average FPS
226 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
55 FPS
100%
Price, $
$119.99
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.53/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Xeon E5-1650 v2 vs Core i5-9400F in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Xeon E5-1650 v2 vs Core i5-9400F in core CPU performance specifications
Xeon E5-1650 v2
Sep 10th, 2013
Cores
6-core
100%
L3 Cache
12 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.5 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.9 GHz
95%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1866 MHz
70%
Core i5-9400F
Jan 8th, 2019
Cores
6-core
100%
L3 Cache
9 MB
75%
Base Frequency
2.9 GHz
83%
Turbo Frequency
4.1 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2666 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Xeon E5-1650 v2 Sep 10th, 2013 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i5-9400F Jan 8th, 2019 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Sep 10th, 2013 | Released | Jan 8th, 2019 |
| – | MSRP | – |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA2011 | Socket | LGA1151 |
| 130 W | Power Consumption | 65 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 1866 MHz (DDR3) | RAM | 2666 MHz (DDR4) |
| No Integrated Graphics | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
