Buy on Amazon
€63.66
In Stock
AvailabilityMSRP in USD: $294
Availability
MSRP in USD: $294
No items available
Availability
Availability
Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-1620 v4 outperforms Celeron G3930 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 197 days older than Celeron G3930.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4
- Performs up to 3% better in Deathloop than Celeron G3930 - 174 vs 169 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G3930 - 8 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G3930
- Consumes up to 64% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 - 51 vs 140 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 doesn't have integrated graphics
Deathloop
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Intel BX80677G3930 Processore Celeron G3930, S 1151, Kaby Lake, Dual Core, 2 Thread, 2.9GHz, 2MB Cache, 1050MHz GPU, 51W, Argento
Buy for €63.66 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 77388 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Xeon E5-1620 v4
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Celeron G3930
Desktop • Jan 3rd, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Celeron G3930
Desktop • Jan 3rd, 2017
Single-Core
608
55.88235294117647%
Multi-Core
1043
26.757311441765008%
Intel Xeon E5-1620 v4 | vs | Intel Celeron G3930 |
|---|---|---|
| Jun 20th, 2016 | Release Date | Jan 3rd, 2017 |
| Xeon E5 | Collection | Celeron |
| Broadwell-E/EP | Codename | Kaby Lake |
| Intel Socket 2011-3 | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 2 |
8 | Threads | 2 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.9 GHz |
| 3.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
| 140 W | TDP | 51 W |
| 14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
35.0x | Multiplier | 29.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 610 |
| No | Overclockable | No |
Similar CPU Comparisons
Select from the most popular similar processor comparisons. Most compared processor combinations, including the currently selected ones, are at the top.
