Xeon E5-1620 v4 vs Xeon Phi 7210

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 E5-1620 v4 vs Xeon Phi 7210 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 E5-1620 v4 vs Xeon Phi 7210: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Xeon E5-1620 v4

2016

Why buy it

✅+0.4% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $715 less on MSRP ($1,166 MSRP vs $1,881 MSRP).
✅Delivers 62.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 6.3 vs 3.9 PassMark/$ ($1,166 MSRP vs $1,881 MSRP).
✅Draws 140W instead of 215W, a 75W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon Phi 7210 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Xeon Phi 7210

2016

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (7,306 vs 7,338).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 3.9 vs 6.3 PassMark/$ ($1,881 MSRP vs $1,166 MSRP).
❌53.6% higher power demand at 215W vs 140W.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon E5-1620 v4 better than Xeon Phi 7210?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Xeon Phi 7210 is ahead with a 3.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Xeon E5-1620 v4 pulls ahead with 0.4% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon E5-1620 v4 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 8 threads.

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

Xeon E5-1620 v4 is the better buy right now. Xeon E5-1620 v4 comes in $715 cheaper on MSRP at $1,166 MSRP versus $1,881 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.4% better PassMark. The compromise is that Xeon Phi 7210 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 3.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 62.0% better value on MSRP (6.3 vs 3.9 PassMark/$), 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 Phi 7210 is the safer long-term CPU choice because it gives you more room to grow and a better platform outlook.

Xeon E5-1620 v4 vs Xeon Phi 7210 Technical Specifications

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

Xeon E5-1620 v4

The Xeon E5-1620 v4 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 June 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Broadwell-EP (2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 10 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 140 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133, DDR4-2400. Passmark benchmark score: 7,338 points. Launch price was $294.

Xeon Phi 7210

The Xeon Phi 7210 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Knights Landing (2016) architecture. It features 64 cores and 256 threads. Base frequency is 1.3 GHz, with boost up to 1.5 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA3647. Thermal design power (TDP): 215 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 7,306 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Xeon E5-1620 v4 packs 4 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon Phi 7210 offers 64 cores / 256 threads — the Xeon Phi 7210 has 60 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.8 GHz on the Xeon E5-1620 v4 versus 1.5 GHz on the Xeon Phi 7210 — a 86.8% clock advantage for the Xeon E5-1620 v4 (base: 3.5 GHz vs 1.3 GHz). The Xeon E5-1620 v4 uses the Broadwell-EP (2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon Phi 7210 uses Knights Landing (2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Xeon E5-1620 v4 scores 7,338 against the Xeon Phi 7210's 7,306 — a 0.4% lead for the Xeon E5-1620 v4. L3 cache: 10 MB (total) on the Xeon E5-1620 v4 vs 0 kB (total) on the Xeon Phi 7210.

Feature	Xeon E5-1620 v4	Xeon Phi 7210
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	64 / 256+1500%
Boost Clock	3.8 GHz+153%	1.5 GHz
Base Clock	3.5 GHz+169%	1.3 GHz
L3 Cache	10 MB (total)	0 kB (total)
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	512 kB (per core)+100%
Process	14 nm	14 nm
Architecture	Broadwell-EP (2016)	Knights Landing (2016)
PassMark	7,338	7,306

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Xeon E5-1620 v4 uses the LGA2011 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon Phi 7210 uses LGA3647 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Xeon E5-1620 v4	Xeon Phi 7210
Socket	LGA2011	LGA3647
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Xeon E5-1620 v4 was priced at $1166, while the Xeon Phi 7210 came in at $1881. On launch pricing ($1166 vs $1881), Xeon E5-1620 v4 was $715 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Xeon E5-1620 v4 delivers 6.3 pts/$ vs 3.9 pts/$ for the Xeon Phi 7210 — making the Xeon E5-1620 v4 the 47.3% better value option.

Feature	Xeon E5-1620 v4	Xeon Phi 7210
MSRP	$1166-38%	$1881
Performance per Dollar	6.3+62%	3.9
Release Date	2016	2016

Search Xeon E5-1620 v4 on Amazon

Search Xeon Phi 7210 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.