In Deathloop, the Xeon E5645 is slightly slower than the Ryzen Threadripper 3960X. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Xeon E5645
- Consumes up to 71% less energy – 80 vs 280 Watts
- Consumes up to 71% less energy
Ryzen Threadripper 3960X
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop – 223 vs 221 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop
- Is 9 years and 8 months newer – Nov 25, 2019 vs Mar 16, 2010
- Is 9 years and 8 months newer
Deathloop FPS Calculator
Xeon E5645 vs Ryzen Threadripper 3960X: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
Ryzen Threadripper 3960X
Nov 25th, 2019
Average FPS
223 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
167 FPS
100%
Price, $
$870.99
100%
Value, $/FPS
$3.9/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Xeon E5645 vs Ryzen Threadripper 3960X in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Ryzen Threadripper 3960X
Nov 25th, 2019
Geekbench 6 Single-Core
1614
100%
Geekbench 6 Multi-Core
12035
100%
Performance Specifications
The Xeon E5645 vs Ryzen Threadripper 3960X in core CPU performance specifications
Xeon E5645
Mar 16th, 2010
Cores
6-core
25%
L3 Cache
12 MB
9%
Base Frequency
2.4 GHz
63%
Turbo Frequency
2.666 GHz
59%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Ryzen Threadripper 3960X
Nov 25th, 2019
Cores
24-core
100%
L3 Cache
128 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.8 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4.5 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
3200 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Xeon E5645 Mar 16th, 2010 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Ryzen Threadripper 3960X Nov 25th, 2019 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Mar 16th, 2010 | Release Date | Nov 25th, 2019 |
| – | MSRP | $1,399.00 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1366 | Socket | TRX4 |
80W | Power Consumption | 280W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 3200 MHz (DDR4) |
| No Integrated Graphics | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
