Intel Core i5-9400F vs Intel Xeon E5-2620

Compare Intel 9th Generation Core i5 6 core CPU vs Intel Xeon E5 Family 6 core processor, specs and benchmark score. Which is the better CPU for gaming?

Benchmark Score
Other Benchmarks
Specifications
Comments (0)
Popular Comparisons

CPU Comparison

Quickly search and compare processors

Intel Xeon E5-2620

Price

The cheapest price from our partner retailers

$ 119.99

$ 87.16 significantly less expensive

$ 207.15

Benchmark Score

Overall Score

A combined score of all workloads

3881 points

44% significantly better overall score

2694 points

Gaming Score

The raw gaming performance with a fast GPU

6224 points

93% significantly better gaming score

3212 points

Multitasking Score

Performance in workloads using up to 8 cores

3150 points

24% slightly better multitasking score

2534 points

Heavy Workload Score

Performance in workloads using up to 16 cores

3023 points

20% slightly better heavy workload score

2503 points

Free CPU Benchmark

Want to compare your processor against the Core i5-9400F and the Xeon E5-2620? Download our free and quick PC Performance Test.

Download CPU Benchmark

Other Benchmarks

Blender score

Cycles Render (Samples per minute)

77.09 points

98% significantly higher Blender score

38.93 points

Geekbench 5 (multi) score

Multi threaded benchmark

4804 points

72% significantly higher Geekbench 5 (multi) score

2793 points

Geekbench 5 (single) score

Single threaded benchmark

1342 points

192% significantly higher Geekbench 5 (single) score

459 points

Geekbench 6 (multi) score

Multi threaded benchmark

4944 points

159% significantly higher Geekbench 6 (multi) score

1902 points

Geekbench 6 (single) score

Single threaded benchmark

1407 points

260% significantly higher Geekbench 6 (single) score

390 points

Specifications

Cores

Number of physical processing units

Identical

Threads

Number of logical processing units

100% significantly more threads

Clock Speed

Base frequency at which the chip operates

2.9 GHz

44% significantly higher clock speed

2 GHz

Turbo Speed

Higher frequency used for heavy workloads

4.1 GHz

63% significantly higher turbo speed

2.5 GHz

TDP

Thermal Design Power: Measure of heat generated by the CPU

65 W

46% significantly lower TDP

95 W

PCIe Lanes

Number of physical connections between the CPU and expansion slots

150% significantly more pcie lanes

Memory Channels

Lanes for simultaneous memory access

100% significantly more memory channels

Supported Memory

Maximum amount of RAM supported by this CPU

128 GiB

384 GiB

200% significantly more supported memory

Other details

Rank

Ranking in the hardwareDB database

444th of 1,089

591st of 1,089

Family

The product line

9th Generation Core i5

Xeon E5 Family

Release date

The official date of release of this chip

2019 February

2012 February

Memory Type

The type of memory used by this chip

DDR4-2666

DDR3-1066

Is Unlocked

Can this CPU can be overclocked

Supports ECC memory

Does this CPU support error correcting memory

Yes

Core i5-9400F vs Xeon E5-2620 benchmarks

In our benchmarks, the Core i5-9400F beats the Xeon E5-2620 in overall performance. Furthermore, our gaming benchmark shows that it also outperforms the Xeon E5-2620 in all gaming tests too.

Info from our database shows that they both have the same core count but the Xeon E5-2620 has more threads. With our hardware info, we find that the Core i5-9400F has a significantly higher clock speed than the Xeon E5-2620. Also, the Core i5-9400F has a significantly higher turbo speed. A Core i5-9400F CPU outputs less heat than a Xeon E5-2620 CPU because of its significantly lower TDP. This measures the amount of heat they output and can be used to estimate power consumption.

Modern CPUs generally have more logical cores than physical cores, this means that each core is split into multiple virtual cores, improving efficiency for parallel workloads. For instance, the Core i5-9400F has the same number of threads as cores. This means the the CPU does not support hyperthreading.