Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-2699A v4 outperforms Celeron 3865U on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Xeon E5-2699A v4 is 70 days older than Celeron 3865U.
Advantages of Intel Celeron 3865U
- Consumes up to 90% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-2699A v4 - 15 vs 145 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-2699A v4 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-2699A v4
- Performs up to 9% better in No Man's Sky than Celeron 3865U - 170 vs 156 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron 3865U - 44 vs 2 threads
No Man's Sky
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Celeron 3865U
Mobile • Jan 3rd, 2017
Xeon E5-2699A v4
Desktop • Oct 25th, 2016
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Celeron 3865U
Mobile • Jan 3rd, 2017
Single-Core
392
33.361702127659576%
Multi-Core
692
7.1940950202723775%
Intel Celeron 3865U | vs | Intel Xeon E5-2699A v4 |
|---|---|---|
Jan 3rd, 2017 | Release Date | Oct 25th, 2016 |
| Celeron | Collection | Xeon E5 |
| Kaby Lake | Codename | Broadwell |
| Intel BGA 1356 | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Mobile | Segment | Desktop |
| 2 | Cores | 22 |
| 2 | Threads | 44 |
| 1.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.4 GHz |
| Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.6 GHz |
15 W | TDP | 145 W |
| 14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
| 18.0x | Multiplier | 24.0x |
Intel HD Graphics 610 | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | No |
