In Atomfall, the Celeron 1007U is slightly slower than the Xeon X3450. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Celeron 1007U
- Is 3 years and 4 months newer – Jan 20, 2013 vs Sep 08, 2009
- Is 3 years and 4 months newer
- Consumes up to 82% less energy – 17 vs 95 Watts
- Consumes up to 82% less energy
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
Xeon X3450
- Up to 3% faster in Atomfall – 188 vs 182 FPS
- Up to 3% faster in Atomfall
Atomfall FPS Calculator
Celeron 1007U vs Xeon X3450: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
All items are out of stock
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Celeron 1007U vs Xeon X3450 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Celeron 1007U vs Xeon X3450 in core CPU performance specifications
Celeron 1007U
Jan 20th, 2013
Cores
2-core
50%
L3 Cache
2 MB
25%
Base Frequency
1.5 GHz
56%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Xeon X3450
Sep 8th, 2009
Cores
4-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.667 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.2 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1333 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Celeron 1007U Jan 20th, 2013 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Xeon X3450 Sep 8th, 2009 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Jan 20th, 2013 | Release Date | Sep 8th, 2009 |
| – | MSRP | $241.00 |
Laptop | Segment | Server |
| Intel BGA 1023 | Socket | LGA1156 |
17W | Power Consumption | 95W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 1333 MHz (DDR3) |
Intel HD | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
