Winner
Intel Xeon E5-1620
CPUBoss recommends the Intel Xeon E5-1620 based on its single-core performance.
See full details Intel Xeon E5-1620 vs Core i7 3770 |
Released March, 2012
Intel Xeon E5-1620
- 3.6 GHz
- Quad core
5.4 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Intel Xeon E5-1620
 | Much better performance per dollar 3.89 pt/$ | | Much better CompuBench 1.5 T-Rex score 0.62 fps |
| | Higher clock speed 3.6 GHz | | More l3 cache 10 MB |
by Johan-De-Gelas (Sep, 2014)Clock speed has clearly been traded in for more cores in most of server SKUs.
VS
Released April, 2012
Intel Core i7 3770
- 3.4 GHz
- Quad core
7.8 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Core i7 3770
| | Has a built-in GPU Yes | | Significantly newer manufacturing process 22 nm |
| | Lower typical power consumption 62.56W | | Higher Maximum operating temperature 67.4 °C |
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of E5-1620 vs 3770 among all CPUs
Performance | |
Benchmark performance using all cores | |
| PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more | |
Single-core Performance | |
Individual core benchmark performance | |
| PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more | |
Integrated Graphics | |
Integrated GPU performance for graphics | |
| Sky Diver and Cloud Gate | |
Integrated Graphics (OpenCL) | |
Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more | |
Performance per Watt | |
How efficiently does the processor use electricity? | |
| Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more | |
Value | |
Are you paying a premium for performance? | |
| Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more | |
| 7.8 | CPUBoss Score |
Combination of all six facets | |
 | Winner |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Intel Xeon E5-1620CPUBoss Winner |  | |
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Much better performance per dollar | 3.89 pt/$ | vs | 2.33 pt/$ | More than 65% better performance per dollar | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Much better CompuBench 1.5 T-Rex score | 0.62 fps | vs | -1 fps | More than 150% better CompuBench 1.5 T-Rex score | |||
| Higher clock speed | 3.6 GHz | vs | 3.4 GHz | More than 5% higher clock speed | |||
| More l3 cache | 10 MB | vs | 8 MB | 25% more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later | |||
| More l3 cache per core | 2.5 MB/core | vs | 2 MB/core | 25% more l3 cache per core | |||
| Supports more RAM | 384,000 MB | vs | 32,768 MB | Supports around 11.8x more RAM | |||
| |||||||
| Has a built-in GPU | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required | |||
| Significantly newer manufacturing process | 22 nm | vs | 32 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
| Lower typical power consumption | 62.56W | vs | 105.63W | More than 40% lower typical power consumption | |||
| Higher Maximum operating temperature | 67.4 °C | vs | 64 °C | More than 5% higher Maximum operating temperature | |||
| Lower annual commercial energy cost | 67.45 $/year | vs | 113.88 $/year | More than 40% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
| Lower annual home energy cost | 18.55 $/year | vs | 31.32 $/year | More than 40% lower annual home energy cost | |||
| Newer | Apr, 2012 | vs | Mar, 2012 | Release date 1 months later | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E5-1620 vs Core i7 3770
CompuBench 1.5 (T-Rex) Data courtesy CompuBench
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
PassMark (Single Core)
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Xeon E5-1620 | vs | Core i7 3770 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 3.6 GHz | 3.4 GHz | |
| Turbo clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 3.9 GHz | |
| Cores | Quad core | Quad core | |
| Socket type | |||
| LGA 2011 | |||
| LGA 1155 | |||
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Supports trusted computing | Yes | Yes | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE4 | |||
| AVX | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE | |||
| SSE4.1 | |||
| SSE4.2 | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| AES | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 130W | 77W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 31.32 $/year | 18.55 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 113.88 $/year | 67.45 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 7.48 pt/W | 7.25 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 105.63W | 62.56W | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | QPI | DMI | |
| Number of links | 0 | 1 | |
| Transfer rate | 0 MT/s | 5,000 MT/s | |
details | Xeon E5-1620 | vs | Core i7 3770 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 8 | 8 | |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 1 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 0.25 MB/core | 0.25 MB/core | |
| L3 cache | 10 MB | 8 MB | |
| L3 cache per core | 2.5 MB/core | 2 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 32 nm | 22 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
| Clock multiplier | 38 | 34 | |
| Operating temperature | Unknown - 64°C | Unknown - 67.4°C | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclocked clock speed | 3.96 GHz | 3.95 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.2 GHz | 4.25 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.96 GHz | 3.95 GHz | |
integrated graphics | |||
| GPU | None | GPU | |
| Label | N/A | Intel® HD Graphics 4000 | |
| Latest DirectX | N/A | 11.x | |
| Number of displays supported | N/A | 3 | |
| GPU clock speed | N/A | 650 MHz | |
| Turbo clock speed | N/A | 1,150 MHz | |
| 3DMark06 | N/A | 5,339.9 | |
memory controller | |||
| Memory controller | Built-in | Built-in | |
| Memory type | |||
| DDR3-1600 | |||
| DDR3-1333 | |||
| DDR3-1066 | |||
| DDR3 | |||
| DDR3-800 | |||
| Channels | Quad Channel | Dual Channel | |
| Supports ECC | Yes | No | |
| Maximum bandwidth | 51,200 MB/s | 25,600 MB/s | |
| Maximum memory size | 384,000 MB | 32,768 MB | |
 Intel Xeon E5-1620  Report a correction |  Intel Core i7 3770 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $375 | $314 | |
| Intel Core i7 2600 vs 3770 | ||
 | VS | |
| $280 | $314 | |
| Intel Core i7 4770 vs 3770 | ||
 | VS | |
| $180 | $314 | |
| Intel Core i5 3470 vs i7 3770 | ||
 | VS | |
| $264 | $314 | |
| Intel Core i7 3770K vs 3770 | ||
 | VS | |
| $168 | $314 | |
| Intel Core i5 3570 vs i7 3770 | ||
 | VS | |
| $192 | $314 | |
| Intel Core i5 4460 vs i7 3770 | ||
 | VS | |
| $160 | $314 | |
| Intel Core i5 4570 vs i7 3770 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| AMD A9 7th Gen A9-9410 vs Intel Core i5 6200U | ||
 | VS | |
| $281 | ||
| AMD A9 7th Gen A9-9420 vs Intel Core i5 6200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $296 | ||
| AMD A12 7th Gen A12-9700P vs Intel Core i7 6700K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $168 | $300 | |
| Intel Core i5 2500 vs Xeon W3520 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| Intel N4200 vs Core i3 6100U | ||
| | VS |  |
| $296 | $272 | |
| Intel Core i7 6700K vs 4790K | ||
| | VS | |
| $296 | ||
| AMD A9 7th Gen A9-9410 vs Intel Core i7 6700K | ||
