In Rust, the Xeon E5620 is slower than the Ryzen 9 7900. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Xeon E5620
No clear advantages
Ryzen 9 7900
- Up to 31% faster in Rust – 274 vs 209 FPS
- Up to 31% faster in Rust
- Is 12 years and 9 months newer – Jan 14, 2023 vs Mar 16, 2010
- Is 12 years and 9 months newer
- Consumes up to 19% less energy – 65 vs 80 Watts
- Consumes up to 19% less energy
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
Rust FPS Calculator
Xeon E5620 vs Ryzen 9 7900: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
Ryzen 9 7900
Jan 14th, 2023
Average FPS
274 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
88 FPS
100%
Price, $
$401
100%
Value, $/FPS
$1.46/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Xeon E5620 vs Ryzen 9 7900 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Xeon E5620 vs Ryzen 9 7900 in core CPU performance specifications
Xeon E5620
Mar 16th, 2010
Cores
4-core
33%
L3 Cache
12 MB
19%
Base Frequency
2.4 GHz
65%
Turbo Frequency
2.666 GHz
49%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Ryzen 9 7900
Jan 14th, 2023
Cores
12-core
100%
L3 Cache
64 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.7 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
5.4 GHz
100%
Max. DDR5 RAM Speed
5200 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Xeon E5620 Mar 16th, 2010 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Ryzen 9 7900 Jan 14th, 2023 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Mar 16th, 2010 | Release Date | Jan 14th, 2023 |
| – | MSRP | $429.00 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1366 | Socket | AM5 |
| 80W | Power Consumption | 65W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 5200 MHz (DDR5) |
| No Integrated Graphics | Integrated GPU | Radeon Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
