Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-2650 v3 outperforms Celeron 1007U on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Xeon E5-2650 v3 is 596 days newer than Celeron 1007U.
Advantages of Intel Celeron 1007U
- Consumes up to 84% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3 - 17 vs 105 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3
- Performs up to 18% better in Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Siege than Celeron 1007U - 495 vs 421 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron 1007U - 20 vs 2 threads
Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Siege
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Celeron 1007U
Mobile • Jan 20th, 2013
Xeon E5-2650 v3
Server/Workstation • Sep 8th, 2014
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron 1007U | vs | Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3 |
|---|---|---|
| Jan 20th, 2013 | Release Date | Sep 8th, 2014 |
| Celeron | Collection | Xeon E5 |
| Ivy Bridge | Codename | Haswell |
| Intel BGA 1023 | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Mobile | Segment | Server |
| 2 | Cores | 10 |
| 2 | Threads | 20 |
| 1.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.3 GHz |
| Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.0 GHz |
17 W | TDP | 105 W |
| 22 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
| 15.0x | Multiplier | 23.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | No |
