Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-2667 v2 outperforms Celeron G1610 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Xeon E5-2667 v2 is 272 days newer than Celeron G1610.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-2667 v2
- Performs up to 2% better in Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Celeron G1610 - 171 vs 167 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 16 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610
- Consumes up to 58% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-2667 v2 - 55 vs 130 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-2667 v2 doesn't have integrated graphics
Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
FPS
167
97%
Value, €/FPS
€0.53/FPS
100%
Price, €
€88.88
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €88.88 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 18068 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Server/Workstation • Sep 1st, 2013
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-2667 v2 | vs | Intel Celeron G1610 |
---|---|---|
Sep 1st, 2013 | Release Date | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
Xeon E5 | Collection | Celeron |
Ivy Bridge EP | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
Intel Socket 2011 | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 2 |
16 | Threads | 2 |
3.3 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.6 GHz |
4.0 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
130 W | TDP | 55 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
33.0x | Multiplier | 26.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD |
No | Overclockable | No |