In Control, the Xeon E5-2680 is same performance as the Celeron G3900. However, it's a much worse value for money, as it's $168 more expensive!
Xeon E5-2680
No clear advantages
Celeron G3900
- Is 3 years and 5 months newer – Sep 01, 2015 vs Mar 06, 2012
- Is 3 years and 5 months newer
- Up to 79% cheaper – $44.04 vs $211.95
- Up to 79% cheaper
- Up to 80% better value in Control – $0.17 vs $0.86/FPS
- Up to 80% better value in Control
- 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
Control FPS Calculator
Xeon E5-2680 vs Celeron G3900: Comparison of performance and price
Xeon E5-2680
Mar 6th, 2012
Average FPS
245 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
160 FPS
100%
Price, $
$211.95
20%
Value, $/FPS
$0.86/FPS
20%
Celeron G3900
Sep 1st, 2015
Average FPS
245 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
160 FPS
100%
Price, $
$44.04
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.17/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Xeon E5-2680 vs Celeron G3900 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Xeon E5-2680 vs Celeron G3900 in core CPU performance specifications
Xeon E5-2680
Mar 6th, 2012
Cores
8-core
100%
L3 Cache
20 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.7 GHz
96%
Turbo Frequency
3.5 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Celeron G3900
Sep 1st, 2015
Cores
2-core
25%
L3 Cache
4 MB
20%
Base Frequency
2.8 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2133 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Xeon E5-2680 Mar 6th, 2012 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Celeron G3900 Sep 1st, 2015 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Mar 6th, 2012 | Release Date | Sep 1st, 2015 |
| – | MSRP | – |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA2011 | Socket | LGA1151 |
| 130W | Power Consumption | 51W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 2133 MHz (DDR3), 2133 MHz (DDR4) |
| No Integrated Graphics | Integrated GPU | Intel HD 510 |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
