In Battlefield 6, the Xeon E5-2640 is much slower than the Core i9-14900K. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Xeon E5-2640
- Consumes up to 24% less energy – 95 vs 125 Watts
- Consumes up to 24% less energy
Core i9-14900K
- Up to 123% faster in Battlefield 6 – 136 vs 61 FPS
- Up to 123% faster in Battlefield 6
- Is 11 years and 7 months newer – Oct 17, 2023 vs Mar 06, 2012
- Is 11 years and 7 months newer
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
Battlefield 6 FPS Calculator
Xeon E5-2640 vs Core i9-14900K: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
Core i9-14900K
Oct 17th, 2023
Average FPS
136 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
102 FPS
100%
Price, $
$452.68
100%
Value, $/FPS
$3.32/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Xeon E5-2640 vs Core i9-14900K in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Xeon E5-2640 vs Core i9-14900K in core CPU performance specifications
Xeon E5-2640
Mar 6th, 2012
Cores
6-core
25%
L3 Cache
15 MB
42%
Base Frequency
2.5 GHz
78%
Turbo Frequency
3 GHz
50%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Core i9-14900K
Oct 17th, 2023
Cores
24-core
100%
L3 Cache
36 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.2 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
6 GHz
100%
Max. DDR5 RAM Speed
5600 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Xeon E5-2640 Mar 6th, 2012 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i9-14900K Oct 17th, 2023 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Mar 6th, 2012 | Released | Oct 17th, 2023 |
| – | MSRP | $589.00 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA2011 | Socket | LGA1700 |
95 W | Power Consumption | 125 W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 3200 MHz (DDR4), 5600 MHz (DDR5) |
| No Integrated Graphics | Integrated GPU | UHD Graphics 770 |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
