Intel Xeon E5-1620 vs Core i7 3770 |
Released March, 2012
Intel Xeon E5-1620
- 3.6 GHz
- Quad core
7.6 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Intel Xeon E5-1620
 | Slightly higher clock speed 3.6 GHz | | Slightly more l3 cache 10 MB |
| | Supports more RAM 384,000 MB | | More l3 cache per core 2.5 MB/core |
by Scott-Michaud (Dec, 2013)Sure, the AMD solution will be available over a year earlier and cost a fraction of the multi-thousand-dollar server processor, but it is somewhat ridiculous to think that a CPU has the theoretical performance available to software render the equivalent of Battlefield 4's medium settings without a GPU (if the software was written with said rendering engine, which it is not... of course).
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 | | Newer manufacturing process 22 nms |
| | Lower typical power consumption 62.56W | | Better PassMark (Single core) score 2,072 |
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of E5-1620 vs 3770
Performance | |
Benchmark performance using all cores | |
| Passmark and GeekBench | |
Single-core Performance | |
Individual core benchmark performance | |
| Passmark (Single Core) | |
Power Consumption | |
How much power does the processor require? | |
| TDP | |
Value | |
| | |
| Performance Per Dollar | |
No winner declared
Too close to call
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Slightly higher clock speed | 3.6 GHz | vs | 3.4 GHz | More than 5% higher clock speed | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Slightly 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 | |||
| Supports more RAM | 384,000 MB | vs | 32,768 MB | Supports around 11.8x more RAM | |||
| More l3 cache per core | 2.5 MB/core | vs | 2 MB/core | 25% more l3 cache per core | |||
| Better performance per dollar | 5.4 pt/$ | vs | 4.1 pt/$ | More than 30% better performance per dollar | |||
| |||||||
| Has a built-in GPU | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required | |||
| Newer manufacturing process | 22 nms | vs | 32 nms | 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 | |||
| Better PassMark (Single core) score | 2,072 | vs | 1,916 | Around 10% better PassMark (Single core) score | |||
| Better performance per watt | 15.96 pt/W | vs | 12.22 pt/W | More than 30% better performance per watt | |||
| 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 | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E5-1620 vs Core i7 3770
GeekBench (32-bit)
GeekBench
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 | |||
| Is hyperthreaded | Yes | Yes | |
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Supports trusted computing | Yes | Yes | |
| Has vitualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction-set-extensions | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE | |||
| SSE4.2 | |||
| AVX | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| SSE4.1 | |||
| 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 | 12.22 pt/W | 15.96 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 105.63W | 62.56W | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | QPI | DMI | |
| Number of links | 1 | 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 nms | 22 nms | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
| Clock multiplier | 38 | 34 | |
| Operating temperature | Unknown - 64°C | Unknown - 67.4°C | |
gpu | |||
| 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 | |||
| DDR3-800 | |||
| 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 |  |
| $310 | $300 | |
| Intel Core i7 4770 vs 3770 | ||
 | VS | |
| $119 | $300 | |
| AMD A8 6500 vs Intel Core i7 3770 | ||
 | VS | |
| $240 | $300 | |
| Intel Core i5 4670K vs i7 3770 | ||
 | VS | |
| $200 | $300 | |
| AMD FX 8350 vs Intel Core i7 3770 | ||
 | VS | |
| $230 | $300 | |
| Intel Core i5 3570K vs i7 3770 | ||
 | VS | |
| $330 | $300 | |
| Intel Core i7 3770K vs 3770 | ||
 | VS | |
| $220 | $300 | |
| Intel Core i5 4670 vs i7 3770 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $340 | ||
| AMD FX 9590 vs Intel Core i7 4770K | ||
| | VS | |
| $340 | $240 | |
| Intel Core i7 4770K vs i5 4670K | ||
 | VS | |
| $332 | $340 | |
| Intel Core I7 4820k vs i7 4770K | ||
| | VS | |
| $240 | $200 | |
| Intel Core i5 4670K vs AMD FX 8350 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $393 | $281 | |
| Intel Core i7 4500U vs i5 4200U | ||
| | VS |  |
| $281 | $225 | |
| Intel Core i5 4200U vs 3230M | ||
 | VS |  |
| $378 | $378 | |
| Intel Core i7 4700MQ vs 4700HQ | ||
