Over 1,000,000 CPUs benchmarked
The Intel Core i9-10900 @ 2.80GHz is newer than Intel Xeon E5-2630L v4 @ 1.80GHz also around 49% faster in multi-threaded (CPU Mark) testing, it is around 47% faster in single-thread testing. However, Intel Core i9-10900 @ 2.80GHz uses around 17% more power. The CPUs selected in this comparison belong in different CPU Classes: Desktop, Server. Consider, selecting CPUs from simliar CPU Class for more apt comparison.The values below were tabulated from a combined 796 benchmarks submitted from our PerformanceTest software and results and are updated daily to include new submissions.
Compare the performance of up to 5 different CPUs
Compare List | |
×Intel Core i9-10900 @ 2.80GHz | ×Intel Xeon E5-2630L v4 @ 1.80GHz | + ADD | |
---|---|---|---|
Price |
$388.77 - BUY
![]() |
Search Online
![]() | |
Socket Type | FCLGA1200 | FCLGA2011-3 | |
CPU Class | Desktop | Server | |
Clockspeed | 2.8 GHz | 1.8 GHz | |
Turbo Speed | Up to 5.2 GHz | Up to 2.9 GHz | |
# of Physical Cores | 10 (Threads: 20) | 10 (Threads: 20) | |
Cache | L1: 640KB, L2: 2.5MB, L3: 20MB | L1: 512KB, L2: 2.0MB, L3: 25MB | |
TDP | 65W | 55W | |
Yearly Running Cost | $11.86 | $10.04 | |
Other | Intel UHD Graphics 630 | ||
First Seen on Chart | Q2 2020 | Q1 2017 | |
# of Samples | 788 | 8 | |
CPU Value | 50.4 | 117.7 | |
Single Thread Rating(% diff. to max in group) | 3020(0.0%) | 1587(-47.5%) | |
CPU Mark(% diff. to max in group) | 19610(0.0%) | 10000(-49.0%) |
Intel Core i9-10900 @ 2.80GHz | 19,610 | |
Intel Xeon E5-2630L v4 @ 1.80GHz | 10,000 | |
PassMark Software © 2008-2025 |
Intel Core i9-10900 @ 2.80GHz | 50.4 | |
Intel Xeon E5-2630L v4 @ 1.80GHz | 117.7 | |
PassMark Software © 2008-2025 |
Intel Core i9-10900 @ 2.80GHz | 3,020 | |
Intel Xeon E5-2630L v4 @ 1.80GHz | 1,587 | |
PassMark Software © 2008-2025 |
Intel Core i9-10900 @ 2.80GHz | Intel Xeon E5-2630L v4 @ 1.80GHz | |
---|---|---|
Max TDP | 65W | 55W |
Power consumption per day (kWh) | NA | NA |
Running cost per day | NA | NA |
Power consumption per year (kWh) | NA | NA |
Running cost per year | NA | NA |