Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-2698 v3 outperforms Celeron G1610 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Xeon E5-2698 v3 is 644 days newer than Celeron G1610.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-2698 v3
- Performs up to 8% better in Overwatch 2 than Celeron G1610 - 341 vs 317 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 32 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610
- Consumes up to 59% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-2698 v3 - 55 vs 135 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-2698 v3 doesn't have integrated graphics
Overwatch 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
FPS
317
92%
Value, €/FPS
€0.23/FPS
100%
Price, €
€72.66
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €72.66 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 4348 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Server/Workstation • Sep 8th, 2014
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-2698 v3 | vs | Intel Celeron G1610 |
---|---|---|
Sep 8th, 2014 | Release Date | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
Xeon E5 | Collection | Celeron |
Haswell | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
Intel Socket 2011-3 | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
16 | Cores | 2 |
32 | Threads | 2 |
2.3 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.6 GHz |
3.6 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
135 W | TDP | 55 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
23.0x | Multiplier | 26.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD |
No | Overclockable | No |