In Deathloop, the Celeron G3900 is slightly slower than the Xeon W3530. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Celeron G3900
- Is 5 years and 5 months newer – Sep 01, 2015 vs Mar 16, 2010
- Is 5 years and 5 months newer
- Consumes up to 61% less energy – 51 vs 130 Watts
- Consumes up to 61% 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 W3530
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop – 223 vs 221 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop
Deathloop FPS Calculator
Celeron G3900 vs Xeon W3530: Comparison of performance and price
Celeron G3900
Sep 1st, 2015
Average FPS
221 FPS
99%
Min 1% FPS
166 FPS
99%
Price, $
$44.04
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.19/FPS
100%
All items are out of stock
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Celeron G3900 vs Xeon W3530 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Celeron G3900 vs Xeon W3530 in core CPU performance specifications
Celeron G3900
Sep 1st, 2015
Cores
2-core
50%
L3 Cache
4 MB
50%
Base Frequency
2.8 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2133 MHz
100%
Xeon W3530
Mar 16th, 2010
Cores
4-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.8 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.066 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Celeron G3900 Sep 1st, 2015 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Xeon W3530 Mar 16th, 2010 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Sep 1st, 2015 | Release Date | Mar 16th, 2010 |
| – | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Server |
| LGA1151 | Socket | LGA1366 |
51W | Power Consumption | 130W |
| Other Features | ||
| 2133 MHz (DDR3), 2133 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | DDR3 |
Intel HD 510 | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
