Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-1620 v4 outperforms Celeron G1840 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 781 days newer than Celeron G1840.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1840
- Consumes up to 62% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 53 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 30% better in F1 23 than Celeron G1840 - 196 vs 151 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1840 - 8 vs 2 threads
F1 23
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Buy for £49.95 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 46 minutes ago
Buy for £49.95 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 47 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Desktop • May 1st, 2014
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Desktop • May 1st, 2014
Single-Core
505
46.41544117647059%
Multi-Core
854
21.908671113391485%
Intel Celeron G1840 | vs | Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 |
---|---|---|
May 1st, 2014 | Release Date | Jun 20th, 2016 |
Celeron | Collection | Xeon E5 |
Haswell | Codename | Broadwell-E/EP |
Intel Socket 1150 | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 4 |
2 | Threads | 8 |
2.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.8 GHz |
53 W | TDP | 140 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
28.0x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
Intel HD (Haswell) | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | No |