Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS
Front view of Intel Celeron G1620T

Intel Celeron G1620T

CPUBoss Winner

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Xeon L5420

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon L5420

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 12 MB vs 0.5 MB 24x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much more l2 cache per core 3 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 12x more l2 cache per core
Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 2 vs 1 Twice as many CPUs in SMP configuration
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.67 GHz vs 2.4 GHz Around 55% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
More cores 4 vs 2 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score 4,968 vs 4,088 More than 20% better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score
More threads 4 vs 2 Twice as many threads
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.85 GHz vs 2.4 GHz More than 60% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of Intel Celeron G1620T

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron G1620T

Report a correction
Much newer manufacturing process 22 nm vs 45 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much better performance per dollar 2.59 pt/$ vs 0.33 pt/$ More than 7.8x better performance per dollar
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Lower typical power consumption 28.44W vs 40.63W 30% lower typical power consumption
Better PassMark (Single core) score 1,283 vs 1,043 Around 25% better PassMark (Single core) score
Lower annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year vs 12.04 $/year 30% lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 30.66 $/year vs 43.8 $/year Around 30% lower annual commercial energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon L5420 vs Celeron G1620T

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Xeon L5420
107,200 MB/s
Celeron G1620T
136.6 MB/s

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon L5420  vs
Celeron G1620T 
Clock speed 2.5 GHz 2.4 GHz
Cores Quad core Dual core
Socket type
LGA 771
LGA 1155

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing No No
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

power consumption

TDP 50W 35W
Annual home energy cost 12.04 $/year 8.43 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 43.8 $/year 30.66 $/year
Performance per watt 2.75 pt/W 3.11 pt/W
Typical power consumption 40.63W 28.44W

details

Xeon L5420  vs
Celeron G1620T 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 2
L2 cache 12 MB 0.5 MB
L2 cache per core 3 MB/core 0.25 MB/core
Manufacture process 45 nm 22 nm
Max CPUs 2 1
Clock multiplier 7 24

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 3.67 GHz 2.4 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.85 GHz 2.4 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.67 GHz 2.4 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU None GPU
Label N/A HD (Ivy Bridge)
Number of displays supported N/A 3
GPU clock speed N/A 650 MHz
Turbo clock speed N/A 1,050 MHz

bus

Architecture FSB DMI
Number of links 1 1
Intel Xeon L5420
Report a correction
Intel Celeron G1620T
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus