Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-1650 v4 outperforms the cheaper Celeron G1620 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Celeron G1620 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Xeon E5-1650 v4 is 1295 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-1650 v4
- Performs up to 13% better in New World than Celeron G1620 - 110 vs 97 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 12 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1620
- Up to 97% cheaper than Xeon E5-1650 v4 - $49.0 vs $1425.0
- Up to 96% better value when playing New World than Xeon E5-1650 v4 - $0.51 vs $12.95 per FPS
- Consumes up to 61% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-1650 v4 - 55 vs 140 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-1650 v4 doesn't have integrated graphics
New World
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
FPS
110
100%
Value, $/FPS
$12.95/FPS
3.9382239382239383%
Price, $
$1425
3%
FPS Winner
Buy for $1,425 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 85 minutes ago
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
FPS
97
88.18181818181819%
Value, $/FPS
$0.51/FPS
100%
Price, $
$49
100%
Value Winner
Buy for $49 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 83 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
Desktop • Jun 20th, 2016
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
409
34.66101694915254%
Multi-Core
723
13.193430656934307%
Intel Xeon E5-1650 v4 | vs | Intel Celeron G1620 |
---|---|---|
Jun 20th, 2016 | Release Date | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
Xeon E5 | Collection | Celeron |
Broadwell-E/EP | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
Intel Socket 2011-3 | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 2 |
12 | Threads | 2 |
3.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.7 GHz |
4.0 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
140 W | TDP | 55 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
36.0x | Multiplier | 27.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD |
No | Overclockable | No |