Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-2667 v3 outperforms Celeron G4900 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Xeon E5-2667 v3 is 1303 days older than Celeron G4900.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G4900
- Consumes up to 60% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-2667 v3 - 54 vs 135 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-2667 v3 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-2667 v3
- Performs up to 3% better in Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Celeron G4900 - 176 vs 171 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G4900 - 8 vs 2 threads
Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Celeron G4900
Desktop • Apr 3rd, 2018
Xeon E5-2667 v3
Server/Workstation • Sep 8th, 2014
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron G4900 | vs | Intel Xeon E5-2667 v3 |
|---|---|---|
Apr 3rd, 2018 | Release Date | Sep 8th, 2014 |
| Celeron | Collection | Xeon E5 |
| Coffee Lake | Codename | Gainestown, Haswell-E/EP, Ivy Bridge, Sandy Bridge-EP/EX |
| Intel Socket 1151 | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Desktop | Segment | Server |
| 2 | Cores | 8 |
| 2 | Threads | 8 |
| 3.1 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.2 GHz |
| Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.6 GHz |
54 W | TDP | 135 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
| 31.0x | Multiplier | 32.0x |
UHD Graphics 610 | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | No |
