Xeon D-1622 vs Xeon E5-2658

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.

Xeon D-1622 vs Xeon E5-2658 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.

Xeon D-1622 vs Xeon E5-2658: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Xeon D-1622

2019

Why buy it

✅Costs $205 less on MSRP ($195 MSRP vs $400 MSRP).
✅Delivers 104.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 31.8 vs 15.6 PassMark/$ ($195 MSRP vs $400 MSRP).
✅Draws 40W instead of 95W, a 55W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E5-2658 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (6,205 vs 6,232).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (6 MB vs 20 MB).

Xeon E5-2658

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +12.3% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+233.3% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 6 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 15.6 vs 31.8 PassMark/$ ($400 MSRP vs $195 MSRP).
❌137.5% higher power demand at 95W vs 40W.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon E5-2658 better than Xeon D-1622?

Yes. Xeon E5-2658 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 12.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.4% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Xeon E5-2658 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 12.3% 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 E5-2658 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 233.3% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 6 MB).

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

Xeon E5-2658 is the easy recommendation for a fresh desktop build. Xeon E5-2658 comes in 105.1% more expensive on MSRP at $400 MSRP versus $195 MSRP, and it still gives you a 12.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Xeon D-1622 only looks good on raw value math because it is a cheap legacy laptop chip, not because it is a real desktop gaming recommendation. It simply does not keep up in modern games, especially when the gap is already 12.3% in the shared gaming data.

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

Xeon D-1622 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2019 vs 2012). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Xeon D-1622 vs Xeon E5-2658 Technical Specifications

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

Xeon D-1622

The Xeon D-1622 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2 April 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Broadwell (2015−2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1667. Thermal design power (TDP): 40 Watt. Memory support: DDR4, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 6,205 points. Launch price was $170.

Xeon E5-2658

The Xeon E5-2658 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 6 March 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge-EP (2012) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 20480 kB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 6,232 points. Launch price was $1,462.

⚡

Processing Power

The Xeon D-1622 packs 4 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon E5-2658 offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Xeon E5-2658 has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.2 GHz on the Xeon D-1622 versus 2.4 GHz on the Xeon E5-2658 — a 28.6% clock advantage for the Xeon D-1622 (base: 2.6 GHz vs 2.1 GHz). The Xeon D-1622 uses the Broadwell (2015−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon E5-2658 uses Sandy Bridge-EP (2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Xeon D-1622 scores 6,205 against the Xeon E5-2658's 6,232 — a 0.4% lead for the Xeon E5-2658. L3 cache: 6 MB on the Xeon D-1622 vs 20480 kB (total) on the Xeon E5-2658.

Feature	Xeon D-1622	Xeon E5-2658
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	8 / 16+100%
Boost Clock	3.2 GHz+33%	2.4 GHz
Base Clock	2.6 GHz+24%	2.1 GHz
L3 Cache	6 MB	20480 kB (total)+233%
L2 Cache	1 MB+300%	256 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Broadwell (2015−2019)	Sandy Bridge-EP (2012)
PassMark	6,205	6,232

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Xeon D-1622 uses the FCBGA1667 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E5-2658 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Xeon D-1622	Xeon E5-2658
Socket	FCBGA1667	LGA2011
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 5.0+67%

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Xeon D-1622 was priced at $195, while the Xeon E5-2658 came in at $400. On launch pricing ($195 vs $400), Xeon D-1622 was $205 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Xeon D-1622 delivers 31.8 pts/$ vs 15.6 pts/$ for the Xeon E5-2658 — making the Xeon D-1622 the 68.5% better value option.

Feature	Xeon D-1622	Xeon E5-2658
MSRP	$195-51%	$400
Performance per Dollar	31.8+104%	15.6
Release Date	2019	2012

Search Xeon D-1622 on Amazon

Search Xeon E5-2658 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.