In Minecraft, the Celeron G1610 is same performance as the Xeon E5540. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Celeron G1610
- Is 3 years and 8 months newer – Dec 03, 2012 vs Mar 30, 2009
- Is 3 years and 8 months newer
- Consumes up to 31% less energy – 55 vs 80 Watts
- Consumes up to 31% 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 E5540
No clear advantages
Minecraft FPS Calculator
Celeron G1610 vs Xeon E5540: Comparison of performance and price
Celeron G1610
Dec 3rd, 2012
Average FPS
1060 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
184 FPS
98%
Price, $
$49
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.04/FPS
100%
All items are out of stock
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Celeron G1610 vs Xeon E5540 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Celeron G1610 vs Xeon E5540 in core CPU performance specifications
Celeron G1610
Dec 3rd, 2012
Cores
2-core
50%
L3 Cache
2 MB
25%
Base Frequency
2.6 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Xeon E5540
Mar 30th, 2009
Cores
4-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.533 GHz
97%
Turbo Frequency
2.8 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1066 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Celeron G1610 Dec 3rd, 2012 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Xeon E5540 Mar 30th, 2009 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Mar 30th, 2009 |
| – | MSRP | $774.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Server |
| LGA1155 | Socket | LGA1366 |
55W | Power Consumption | 80W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 1066 MHz (DDR3) |
Intel HD | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
