Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-1620 v4 outperforms Celeron 3205U on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Xeon E5-1620 v4 is 477 days newer than Celeron 3205U.
Advantages of Intel Celeron 3205U
- Consumes up to 89% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 15 vs 140 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4
- Performs up to 11% better in Sons Of The Forest than Celeron 3205U - 98 vs 88 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron 3205U - 8 vs 2 threads
Sons Of The Forest
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Celeron 3205U
Mobile • Mar 1st, 2015
Xeon E5-1620 v4
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron 3205U | vs | Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 1st, 2015 | Release Date | Jun 20th, 2016 |
| Celeron | Collection | Xeon E5 |
| Broadwell | Codename | Broadwell-E/EP |
| Intel BGA 1168 | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Mobile | Segment | Desktop |
| 2 | Cores | 4 |
| 2 | Threads | 8 |
| 1.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
| Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.8 GHz |
15 W | TDP | 140 W |
| 14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
| 15.0x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | No |
