Key Differences
In short — Xeon E3-1240 outperforms Celeron G3930 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Xeon E3-1240 is 2102 days older than Celeron G3930.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E3-1240
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G3930 - 8 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G3930
- Consumes up to 36% less energy than Intel Xeon E3-1240 - 51 vs 80 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E3-1240 doesn't have integrated graphics
Dead Space
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jan 3rd, 2017
FPS
145
100%
Value, €/FPS
€0.35/FPS
100%
Price, €
€50.95
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €50.95 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 8 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Server/Workstation • Apr 3rd, 2011
Desktop • Jan 3rd, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E3-1240 | vs | Intel Celeron G3930 |
---|---|---|
Apr 3rd, 2011 | Release Date | Jan 3rd, 2017 |
Xeon E3 | Collection | Celeron |
Sandy Bridge | Codename | Kaby Lake |
Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 2 |
8 | Threads | 2 |
3.3 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.9 GHz |
3.7 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
80 W | TDP | 51 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
33.0x | Multiplier | 29.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 610 |
No | Overclockable | No |