F5F Stay Refreshed Hardware Desktop Comparing Intel Xeon E5-2667 v4 and 1660 v4 highlights their differences in performance and features.

Comparing Intel Xeon E5-2667 v4 and 1660 v4 highlights their differences in performance and features.

Comparing Intel Xeon E5-2667 v4 and 1660 v4 highlights their differences in performance and features.

C
ChloeET
Senior Member
736
03-16-2018, 06:16 AM
#1
I upgraded my workstation based on my research. The scores I found are: 8-core E5-2667V4 at 25MB cache, 3.2/3.6GHz; 25MB GB6 S1147 M6824 at 3.2/3.8GHz; 20MB GB6 S1158 M6859 at 3.4/4.0GHz; 20MB E5-2643V4 at 3.4/3.6/3.7GHz; 15MB GB6 S1228 M5482 at 3.6/4.0GHz; and 20MB E5-1650V4 at 3.6/4.0GHz with 4 cores. For gaming, I’m considering the 2667 V4 with its 25MB cache for better performance, while the 1660 V4 offers higher clock speeds but less cache. The 1650 V4 has fewer cores and lower clocks but more speed. It seems the 1660 V4 could be a strong choice if you prioritize responsiveness, whereas the 2667 provides solid value with extra cache. The 1228 M5482 model also looks promising at 20MB with decent specs.
C
ChloeET
03-16-2018, 06:16 AM #1

I upgraded my workstation based on my research. The scores I found are: 8-core E5-2667V4 at 25MB cache, 3.2/3.6GHz; 25MB GB6 S1147 M6824 at 3.2/3.8GHz; 20MB GB6 S1158 M6859 at 3.4/4.0GHz; 20MB E5-2643V4 at 3.4/3.6/3.7GHz; 15MB GB6 S1228 M5482 at 3.6/4.0GHz; and 20MB E5-1650V4 at 3.6/4.0GHz with 4 cores. For gaming, I’m considering the 2667 V4 with its 25MB cache for better performance, while the 1660 V4 offers higher clock speeds but less cache. The 1650 V4 has fewer cores and lower clocks but more speed. It seems the 1660 V4 could be a strong choice if you prioritize responsiveness, whereas the 2667 provides solid value with extra cache. The 1228 M5482 model also looks promising at 20MB with decent specs.

J
JBgames_jurne
Junior Member
20
03-16-2018, 06:16 AM
#2
It's just a small 0.3 GHz boost, I think the cache would help more. But it wouldn't change much because the cache only increased by about 5 MB for gaming—not enough to notice. Gaming isn't too sensitive to clock speed, and higher clocks usually bring more heat (as you know from Intel). I'd say going with 2667 is a solid choice.
J
JBgames_jurne
03-16-2018, 06:16 AM #2

It's just a small 0.3 GHz boost, I think the cache would help more. But it wouldn't change much because the cache only increased by about 5 MB for gaming—not enough to notice. Gaming isn't too sensitive to clock speed, and higher clocks usually bring more heat (as you know from Intel). I'd say going with 2667 is a solid choice.

A
amyeenhoorn
Member
121
03-16-2018, 06:16 AM
#3
In gaming, you don't require a lot of cores.
A
amyeenhoorn
03-16-2018, 06:16 AM #3

In gaming, you don't require a lot of cores.

J
julien190901
Member
192
03-16-2018, 06:16 AM
#4
It aligns with my understanding. I hope to locate a comparison for the 2.
J
julien190901
03-16-2018, 06:16 AM #4

It aligns with my understanding. I hope to locate a comparison for the 2.

L
Loroi
Member
137
03-16-2018, 06:16 AM
#5
It's likely influenced by the game itself.
L
Loroi
03-16-2018, 06:16 AM #5

It's likely influenced by the game itself.