Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-2650 v3 outperforms Celeron 3965U on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Xeon E5-2650 v3 is 848 days older than Celeron 3965U.
Advantages of Intel Celeron 3965U
- Consumes up to 86% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3 - 15 vs 105 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3
- Performs up to 2% better in God of War than Celeron 3965U - 167 vs 163 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron 3965U - 20 vs 2 threads
God of War
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Mobile • Jan 3rd, 2017
Server/Workstation • Sep 8th, 2014
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron 3965U | vs | Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3 |
---|---|---|
Jan 3rd, 2017 | Release Date | Sep 8th, 2014 |
Celeron | Collection | Xeon E5 |
Kaby Lake | Codename | Haswell |
Intel BGA 1356 | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Mobile | Segment | Server |
2 | Cores | 10 |
2 | Threads | 20 |
2.2 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.3 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.0 GHz |
15 W | TDP | 105 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
22.0x | Multiplier | 23.0x |
Intel HD Graphics 610 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | No |