Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-2650 v3 outperforms Celeron 3205U on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Xeon E5-2650 v3 is 174 days older than Celeron 3205U.
Advantages of Intel Celeron 3205U
- 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 13% better in Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 than Celeron 3205U - 98 vs 87 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron 3205U - 20 vs 2 threads
Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Celeron 3205U
Mobile • Mar 1st, 2015
Xeon E5-2650 v3
Server/Workstation • Sep 8th, 2014
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron 3205U | vs | Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3 |
|---|---|---|
Mar 1st, 2015 | Release Date | Sep 8th, 2014 |
| Celeron | Collection | Xeon E5 |
| Broadwell | Codename | Haswell |
| Intel BGA 1168 | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Mobile | Segment | Server |
| 2 | Cores | 10 |
| 2 | Threads | 20 |
| 1.5 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 |
| 15.0x | Multiplier | 23.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | No |
