Intel Xeon 5020 vs Celeron 847 |
First seen on January, 2013
Intel Xeon 5020
- 2.5 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Intel Xeon 5020
 | Much more l2 cache 4 MB | | Much higher clock speed 2.5 GHz |
| | Much more l2 cache per core 2 MB/core | | Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 2 |
VS
Released June, 2011
Intel Celeron 847
- 1.1 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Celeron 847
| | Much newer manufacturing process 32 nm | | Much lower typical power consumption 13.81W |
| | Much lower annual home energy cost 4.1 $/year | | Much lower annual commercial energy cost 14.89 $/year |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Much more l2 cache | 4 MB | vs | 1 MB | 4x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Much higher clock speed | 2.5 GHz | vs | 1.1 GHz | More than 2.2x higher clock speed | |||
| Much more l2 cache per core | 2 MB/core | vs | 0.5 MB/core | 4x more l2 cache per core | |||
| Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration | 2 | vs | 1 | Twice as many CPUs in SMP configuration | |||
| Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 2.5 GHz | vs | 1.1 GHz | More than 2.2x better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
| More threads | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many threads | |||
| Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 2.5 GHz | vs | 1.1 GHz | More than 2.2x better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
| |||||||
| Much newer manufacturing process | 32 nm | vs | 65 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
| Much lower typical power consumption | 13.81W | vs | 77.19W | 5.6x lower typical power consumption | |||
| Much lower annual home energy cost | 4.1 $/year | vs | 22.89 $/year | 5.6x lower annual home energy cost | |||
| Much lower annual commercial energy cost | 14.89 $/year | vs | 83.22 $/year | 5.6x lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
Report a correction
Features Key features of the Xeon 5020 vs Celeron 847
clock speed
L2 cache
overclocked clock speed (air)
overclocked clock speed (water)
TDP
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Xeon 5020 | vs | Celeron 847 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 2.5 GHz | 1.1 GHz | |
| Cores | Dual core | Dual core | |
| Socket type | |||
| LGA 771 | |||
| BGA 1023 | |||
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE4 | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE | |||
| SSE4.1 | |||
| SSE4.2 | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
details | Xeon 5020 | vs | Celeron 847 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Threads | 4 | 2 | |
| L2 cache | 4 MB | 1 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 2 MB/core | 0.5 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 65 nm | 32 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 2 | 1 | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclocked clock speed | 2.5 GHz | 1.1 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 2.5 GHz | 1.1 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 2.5 GHz | 1.1 GHz | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 95W | 17W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 22.89 $/year | 4.1 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 83.22 $/year | 14.89 $/year | |
| Typical power consumption | 77.19W | 13.81W | |
 Intel Xeon 5020  Report a correction |  Intel Celeron 847 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $134 | $225 | |
| 847 vs 3217U | ||
| | VS |  |
| $134 | $42 | |
| 847 vs N2600 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $134 | $75 | |
| 847 vs 1007U | ||
| | VS |  |
| $134 | ||
| 847 vs 350 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $134 | $72 | |
| 847 vs J1800 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $134 | $63 | |
| 847 vs D525 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $134 | $75 | |
| 847 vs 1037U | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $305 | $300 | |
| W3520 vs 2500 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $272 | $350 | |
| 4790K vs 6700K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 4200U vs 6410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 6200U vs 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $275 | $161 | |
| 4005U vs N3540 | ||
 | VS | |
| $250 | $350 | |
| 6600K vs 6700K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $248 | $230 | |
| 4770K vs 9590 | ||
