Key Differences
In short — Celeron G1840 outperforms Xeon E5-2609 v2 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Celeron G1840 is 242 days newer than Xeon E5-2609 v2.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-2609 v2
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1840 - 4 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1840
- Performs up to 9% better in Counter-Strike 2 than Xeon E5-2609 v2 - 242 vs 222 FPS
- Consumes up to 34% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-2609 v2 - 53 vs 80 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-2609 v2 doesn't have integrated graphics
Counter-Strike 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
Xeon E5-2609 v2
Server/Workstation • Sep 1st, 2013
Celeron G1840
Desktop • May 1st, 2014
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-2609 v2 | vs | Intel Celeron G1840 |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 1st, 2013 | Release Date | May 1st, 2014 |
| Xeon E5 | Collection | Celeron |
| Ivy Bridge | Codename | Haswell |
| Intel Socket 2011 | Socket | Intel Socket 1150 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 2 |
4 | Threads | 2 |
| 2.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.8 GHz |
| 2.5 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
| 80 W | TDP | 53 W |
| 22 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
| 25.0x | Multiplier | 28.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD (Haswell) |
| No | Overclockable | No |
