CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of E5-1620 vs 4790K 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

8.5

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Core i7 4790K 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core i7 4790K  based on its performance and single-core performance.

See full details

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS
Front view of Intel Core i7 4790K

Intel Core i7 4790K

CPUBoss Winner

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Xeon E5-1620

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon E5-1620

Report a correction
Supports trusted computing Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing
More l3 cache per core 2.5 MB/core vs 2 MB/core 25% more l3 cache per core
Better performance per dollar 4.09 pt/$ vs 3.69 pt/$ More than 10% better performance per dollar
Supports more RAM 384,000 MB vs 32,768 MB Supports around 11.8x more RAM
Front view of Intel Core i7 4790K

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i7 4790K

Report a correction
Higher turbo clock speed 4.4 GHz vs 3.8 GHz More than 15% higher turbo clock speed
Much newer manufacturing process 22 nm vs 32 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Higher clock speed 4 GHz vs 3.6 GHz More than 10% higher clock speed
Lower typical power consumption 71.5W vs 105.63W More than 30% lower typical power consumption
Better CompuBench 1.5 T-Rex score 1.79 fps vs 0.62 fps More than 2.8x better CompuBench 1.5 T-Rex score
Better geekbench 3 single core score 4,004 vs 3,066 More than 30% better geekbench 3 single core score
Higher Maximum operating temperature 74.04 °C vs 64 °C More than 15% higher Maximum operating temperature
Newer Apr, 2014 vs Mar, 2012 Release date over 2 years later
Better performance per watt 11.39 pt/W vs 7.42 pt/W Around 55% better performance per watt
Lower annual commercial energy cost 77.09 $/year vs 113.88 $/year More than 30% lower annual commercial energy cost
Lower annual home energy cost 21.2 $/year vs 31.32 $/year More than 30% lower annual home energy cost
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.8 GHz vs 3.6 GHz Around 35% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E5-1620 vs Core i7 4790K

CompuBench 1.5 (T-Rex) Data courtesy CompuBench

Xeon E5-1620
0.62 fps
Core i7 4790K
1.79 fps

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E5-1620
12,397
Core i7 4790K
15,490

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E5-1620
2,460,000 MB/s
Core i7 4790K
5,140,000 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E5-1620
13,003
Core i7 4790K
15,465

GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon E5-1620
13,786
Core i7 4790K
16,653

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon E5-1620  vs
Core i7 4790K 
Clock speed 3.6 GHz 4 GHz
Turbo clock speed 3.8 GHz 4.4 GHz
Cores Quad core Quad core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing Yes No
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
F16C
MMX
SSE4
AVX
SSE3
EM64T
SSE
SSE4.1
FMA3
SSE4.2
Supplemental SSE3
AES
AVX 2.0
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 130W 88W
Annual home energy cost 31.32 $/year 21.2 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 113.88 $/year 77.09 $/year
Performance per watt 7.42 pt/W 11.39 pt/W
Typical power consumption 105.63W 71.5W

bus

Architecture QPI DMI 2.0
Number of links 0 0
Transfer rate 0 MT/s 5,000 MT/s

details

Xeon E5-1620  vs
Core i7 4790K 
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
Operating temperature Unknown - 64°C Unknown - 74.04°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 4.17 GHz 4.64 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.6 GHz 4.8 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.17 GHz 4.64 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU None GPU
Label N/A Intel® HD Graphics 4600
Number of displays supported N/A 3
GPU clock speed N/A 350 MHz
Turbo clock speed N/A 1,250 MHz

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1600
DDR3L-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 4790K
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus