Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-2609 v3 outperforms Celeron G530 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Xeon E5-2609 v3 is 1100 days newer than Celeron G530.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-2609 v3
- Performs up to 13% better in Counter-Strike 2 than Celeron G530 - 251 vs 223 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G530 - 6 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G530
- Consumes up to 24% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-2609 v3 - 65 vs 85 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-2609 v3 doesn't have integrated graphics
Counter-Strike 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
Xeon E5-2609 v3
Server/Workstation • Sep 8th, 2014
Celeron G530
Desktop • Sep 4th, 2011
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-2609 v3 | vs | Intel Celeron G530 |
|---|---|---|
Sep 8th, 2014 | Release Date | Sep 4th, 2011 |
| Xeon E5 | Collection | Celeron |
| Haswell-E/EP, Sandy Bridge-EP/EX | Codename | Sandy Bridge |
| Intel Socket 2011-3 | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 2 |
6 | Threads | 2 |
| 1.9 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.4 GHz |
| Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
| 85 W | TDP | 65 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
| 19.0x | Multiplier | 24.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD (Sandy Bridge) |
| No | Overclockable | No |
