In Deathloop, the Xeon E5630 is slightly slower than the Core i5-11600K. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Xeon E5630
- Consumes up to 36% less energy – 80 vs 125 Watts
- Consumes up to 36% less energy
Core i5-11600K
- Up to 2% faster in Deathloop – 227 vs 223 FPS
- Up to 2% faster in Deathloop
- Is 11 years newer – Mar 16, 2021 vs Mar 16, 2010
- Is 11 years newer
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
Deathloop FPS Calculator
Xeon E5630 vs Core i5-11600K: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
Core i5-11600K
Mar 16th, 2021
Average FPS
227 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
170 FPS
100%
Price, $
$199
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.87/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Xeon E5630 vs Core i5-11600K in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Xeon E5630 vs Core i5-11600K in core CPU performance specifications
Xeon E5630
Mar 16th, 2010
Cores
4-core
67%
L3 Cache
12 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.533 GHz
65%
Turbo Frequency
2.8 GHz
57%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Core i5-11600K
Mar 16th, 2021
Cores
6-core
100%
L3 Cache
12 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.9 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4.9 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
3200 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Xeon E5630 Mar 16th, 2010 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i5-11600K Mar 16th, 2021 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Mar 16th, 2010 | Release Date | Mar 16th, 2021 |
| – | MSRP | $262.00 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1366 | Socket | LGA1200 |
80W | Power Consumption | 125W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 3200 MHz (DDR4) |
| No Integrated Graphics | Integrated GPU | UHD Graphics 750 |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
