In Deathloop, the Xeon E5645 is slightly slower than the Core i7-640M. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Xeon E5645
No clear advantages
Core i7-640M
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop – 223 vs 221 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop
- Is 6 months and 11 days newer – Sep 26, 2010 vs Mar 16, 2010
- Is 6 months and 11 days newer
- Consumes up to 56% less energy – 35 vs 80 Watts
- Consumes up to 56% less energy
- 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 E5645 vs Core i7-640M: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
All items are out of stock
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Xeon E5645 vs Core i7-640M in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Xeon E5645 vs Core i7-640M in core CPU performance specifications
Xeon E5645
Mar 16th, 2010
Cores
6-core
100%
L3 Cache
12 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.4 GHz
86%
Turbo Frequency
2.666 GHz
77%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Core i7-640M
Sep 26th, 2010
Cores
2-core
33%
L3 Cache
4 MB
33%
Base Frequency
2.8 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.467 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1066 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Xeon E5645 Mar 16th, 2010 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i7-640M Sep 26th, 2010 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Mar 16th, 2010 | Release Date | Sep 26th, 2010 |
| – | MSRP | $346.00 |
Server | Segment | Laptop |
| LGA1366 | Socket | Intel BGA 1288 |
| 80W | Power Consumption | 35W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 1066 MHz (DDR3) |
| No Integrated Graphics | Integrated GPU | HD Graphics (Ironlake) |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
