Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-2650 v3 outperforms Celeron G1620 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 644 days newer than Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1620
- Consumes up to 48% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3 - 55 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 2% better in Dishonored 2 than Celeron G1620 - 260 vs 254 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 20 vs 2 threads
Dishonored 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
FPS
254
97.6923076923077%
Value, $/FPS
$0.19/FPS
100%
Price, $
$49
100%
Value Winner
Buy for $49 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 31081 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Server/Workstation • Sep 8th, 2014
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
409
46.16252821670429%
Multi-Core
723
13.443659352919301%
Intel Celeron G1620 | vs | Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3 |
---|---|---|
Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Sep 8th, 2014 |
Celeron | Collection | Xeon E5 |
Ivy Bridge | Codename | Haswell |
Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Desktop | Segment | Server |
2 | Cores | 10 |
2 | Threads | 20 |
2.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.3 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.0 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 105 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
27.0x | Multiplier | 23.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | No |