In Control, the Xeon E5-2667 is slightly slower than the Core i3-9100F and it's also a much worse value for money, as it's $61 more expensive!
Xeon E5-2667
No clear advantages
Core i3-9100F
- Up to 1% faster in Control – 248 vs 245 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Control
- Is 7 years and 1 month newer – Apr 23, 2019 vs Mar 06, 2012
- Is 7 years and 1 month newer
- Up to 39% cheaper – $96.00 vs $156.80
- Up to 39% cheaper
- Up to 41% better value in Control – $0.38 vs $0.64/FPS
- Up to 41% better value in Control
- Consumes up to 50% less energy – 65 vs 130 Watts
- Consumes up to 50% less energy
Control FPS Calculator
Xeon E5-2667 vs Core i3-9100F: Comparison of performance and price
Xeon E5-2667
Mar 6th, 2012
Average FPS
245 FPS
99%
Min 1% FPS
160 FPS
98%
Price, $
$156.8
61%
Value, $/FPS
$0.64/FPS
59%
Core i3-9100F
Apr 23rd, 2019
Average FPS
248 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
163 FPS
100%
Price, $
$96
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.38/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Xeon E5-2667 vs Core i3-9100F in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Xeon E5-2667 vs Core i3-9100F in core CPU performance specifications
Xeon E5-2667
Mar 6th, 2012
Cores
6-core
100%
L3 Cache
15 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.9 GHz
81%
Turbo Frequency
3.5 GHz
83%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Core i3-9100F
Apr 23rd, 2019
Cores
4-core
67%
L3 Cache
6 MB
40%
Base Frequency
3.6 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4.2 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2400 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Xeon E5-2667 Mar 6th, 2012 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i3-9100F Apr 23rd, 2019 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Mar 6th, 2012 | Release Date | Apr 23rd, 2019 |
| – | MSRP | $122.00 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA2011 | Socket | LGA1151 |
| 130W | Power Consumption | 65W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 2400 MHz (DDR4) |
| No Integrated Graphics | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
