Core i7-4820K vs Xeon E5-1620 v2

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Core i7-4820K vs Xeon E5-1620 v2 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core i7-4820K vs Xeon E5-1620 v2: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core i7-4820K

2013

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E5-1620 v2 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (6,515 vs 6,523).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 19.6 vs 22.2 PassMark/$ ($332 MSRP vs $294 MSRP).

Xeon E5-1620 v2

2013

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.7% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $38 less on MSRP ($294 MSRP vs $332 MSRP).
✅Delivers 13.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 22.2 vs 19.6 PassMark/$ ($294 MSRP vs $332 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon E5-1620 v2 better than Core i7-4820K?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5-1620 v2 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i7-4820K is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Xeon E5-1620 v2 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 3.7% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon E5-1620 v2 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.1% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 8 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Xeon E5-1620 v2 is the better buy right now. Xeon E5-1620 v2 comes in $38 cheaper on MSRP at $294 MSRP versus $332 MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 13.1% better value on MSRP (22.2 vs 19.6 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Xeon E5-1620 v2 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 8 threads instead of 4/8. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core i7-4820K vs Xeon E5-1620 v2 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core i7-4820K

The Core i7-4820K is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge-E (2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 3.9 GHz. L3 cache: 10 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 130 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 6,515 points. Launch price was $399.

Xeon E5-1620 v2

The Xeon E5-1620 v2 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge-E (2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 3.9 GHz. L3 cache: 10 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 130 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 6,523 points. Launch price was $315.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core i7-4820K and Xeon E5-1620 v2 share an identical 4-core/8-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.9 GHz on the Core i7-4820K versus 3.9 GHz on the Xeon E5-1620 v2 — identical boost frequencies (base: 3.7 GHz vs 3.7 GHz). Both are built on the Ivy Bridge-E (2013) architecture using a 22 nm process. In PassMark, the Core i7-4820K scores 6,515 against the Xeon E5-1620 v2's 6,523 — a 0.1% lead for the Xeon E5-1620 v2. Both processors carry 10 MB (total) of L3 cache.

Feature	Core i7-4820K	Xeon E5-1620 v2
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	4 / 8
Boost Clock	3.9 GHz	3.9 GHz
Base Clock	3.7 GHz	3.7 GHz
L3 Cache	10 MB (total)	10 MB (total)
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	256 kB (per core)
Process	22 nm	22 nm
Architecture	Ivy Bridge-E (2013)	Ivy Bridge-E (2013)
PassMark	6,515	6,523

🧠

Memory & Platform

Both processors use the LGA2011 socket with PCIe 3.0.

Feature	Core i7-4820K	Xeon E5-1620 v2
Socket	LGA2011	LGA2011
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Core i7-4820K was priced at $332, while the Xeon E5-1620 v2 came in at $294. On launch pricing ($332 vs $294), Xeon E5-1620 v2 was $38 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-4820K delivers 19.6 pts/$ vs 22.2 pts/$ for the Xeon E5-1620 v2 — making the Xeon E5-1620 v2 the 12.3% better value option.

Feature	Core i7-4820K	Xeon E5-1620 v2
MSRP	$332	$294-11%
Performance per Dollar	19.6	22.2+13%
Release Date	2013	2013

Search Core i7-4820K on Amazon

Search Xeon E5-1620 v2 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.