In Deathloop, the Xeon E5520 is slightly faster than the Celeron G3930. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Xeon E5520
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop – 223 vs 221 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop
Celeron G3930
- Is 7 years and 9 months newer – Jan 03, 2017 vs Mar 30, 2009
- Is 7 years and 9 months newer
- Consumes up to 36% less energy – 51 vs 80 Watts
- Consumes up to 36% less energy
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
Deathloop FPS Calculator
Xeon E5520 vs Celeron G3930: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
Celeron G3930
Jan 3rd, 2017
Average FPS
221 FPS
99%
Min 1% FPS
166 FPS
99%
Price, $
$29
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.13/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Xeon E5520 vs Celeron G3930 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Xeon E5520 vs Celeron G3930 in core CPU performance specifications
Xeon E5520
Mar 30th, 2009
Cores
4-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.266 GHz
78%
Turbo Frequency
2.533 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Celeron G3930
Jan 3rd, 2017
Cores
2-core
50%
L3 Cache
2 MB
25%
Base Frequency
2.9 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2400 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Xeon E5520 Mar 30th, 2009 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Celeron G3930 Jan 3rd, 2017 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Mar 30th, 2009 | Release Date | Jan 3rd, 2017 |
| – | MSRP | – |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1366 | Socket | LGA1151 |
| 80W | Power Consumption | 51W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 2400 MHz (DDR4) |
| No Integrated Graphics | Integrated GPU | Intel HD 610 |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
