Key Differences
In short — Celeron G6900 outperforms Xeon E5-1620 v4 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Celeron G6900 is 2024 days newer than Xeon E5-1620 v4.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G6900 - 8 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G6900
- Performs up to 3% better in Deathloop than Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 180 vs 174 FPS
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 doesn't have integrated graphics
Deathloop
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Xeon E5-1620 v4
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Celeron G6900
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2022
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 | vs | Intel Celeron G6900 |
|---|---|---|
| Jun 20th, 2016 | Release Date | Jan 4th, 2022 |
| Xeon E5 | Collection | Celeron |
| Broadwell-E/EP | Codename | Alder Lake |
| Intel Socket 2011-3 | Socket | Intel Socket 1700 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 2 |
8 | Threads | 2 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.4 GHz |
| 3.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
| 140 W | TDP | Not Available |
| 14 nm | Process Size | 10 nm |
35.0x | Multiplier | 34.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 710 |
| No | Overclockable | No |
