In Atomfall, the Xeon E5530 is slightly faster than the Celeron G1610. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Xeon E5530
- Up to 1% faster in Atomfall – 188 vs 187 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Atomfall
Celeron G1610
- Is 3 years and 8 months newer – Dec 03, 2012 vs Mar 30, 2009
- Is 3 years and 8 months newer
- Consumes up to 31% less energy – 55 vs 80 Watts
- Consumes up to 31% less energy
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
Atomfall FPS Calculator
Xeon E5530 vs Celeron G1610: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
Celeron G1610
Dec 3rd, 2012
Average FPS
187 FPS
99%
Min 1% FPS
140 FPS
99%
Price, $
$49
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.26/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Xeon E5530 vs Celeron G1610 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Xeon E5530 vs Celeron G1610 in core CPU performance specifications
Xeon E5530
Mar 30th, 2009
Cores
4-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.4 GHz
92%
Turbo Frequency
2.666 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1066 MHz
100%
Celeron G1610
Dec 3rd, 2012
Cores
2-core
50%
L3 Cache
2 MB
25%
Base Frequency
2.6 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Xeon E5530 Mar 30th, 2009 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Celeron G1610 Dec 3rd, 2012 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Mar 30th, 2009 | Release Date | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
| $530.00 | MSRP | – |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1366 | Socket | LGA1155 |
| 80W | Power Consumption | 55W |
| Other Features | ||
| 1066 MHz (DDR3) | RAM | DDR3 |
| No Integrated Graphics | Integrated GPU | Intel HD |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
