Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-2630 outperforms Celeron G1620 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Xeon E5-2630 is 272 days older than Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-2630
- Performs up to 1% better in Assassin's Creed Odyssey than Celeron G1620 - 116 vs 115 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 12 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1620
- Consumes up to 42% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-2630 - 55 vs 95 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-2630 doesn't have integrated graphics
Assassin's Creed Odyssey
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Xeon E5-2630
Server/Workstation • Mar 6th, 2012
Celeron G1620
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-2630 | vs | Intel Celeron G1620 |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 6th, 2012 | Release Date | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
| Xeon E5 | Collection | Celeron |
| Sandy Bridge-EP | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
| Intel Socket 2011 | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 2 |
12 | Threads | 2 |
| 2.3 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.7 GHz |
| 2.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
| 95 W | TDP | 55 W |
| 32 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
| 23.0x | Multiplier | 27.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD |
| No | Overclockable | No |
