Xeon W-3245 vs Celeron N3450
Aggregate performance score
Xeon W-3245 outperforms Celeron N3450 by a whopping 1461% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2526 | 377 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.17 | 4.36 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | Intel Celeron | Intel Xeon W |
| Power efficiency | 7.97 | 3.64 |
| Designer | Intel | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Apollo Lake (2014−2016) | Cascade Lake (2019−2020) |
| Release date | 30 August 2016 (8 years ago) | 3 June 2019 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $107 | $1,999 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Xeon W-3245 has 2465% better value for money than Celeron N3450.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Celeron N3450 and Xeon W-3245 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 32 |
| Base clock speed | 1.1 GHz | 3.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.2 GHz | 4.6 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 3.0 |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | 11 | 32 |
| L1 cache | no data | 1 MB |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 16 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 22 MB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | 77 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron N3450 and Xeon W-3245 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 (Uniprocessor) | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | FCBGA1296 | FCLGA3647 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6 Watt | 205 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N3450 and Xeon W-3245. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® AVX-512 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | + |
| TSX | - | + |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Smart Response | - | no data |
| GPIO | + | no data |
| Smart Connect | - | no data |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | + |
| HD Audio | + | no data |
| RST | - | no data |
| Deep Learning Boost | - | + |
Security technologies
Celeron N3450 and Xeon W-3245 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | + |
| EDB | + | + |
| Secure Boot | + | no data |
| MPX | + | - |
| Identity Protection | + | - |
| OS Guard | + | no data |
| Anti-Theft | - | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N3450 and Xeon W-3245 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| VT-i | - | no data |
| EPT | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N3450 and Xeon W-3245. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3, DDR4 | DDR4-2933 |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB | 1 TB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 6 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 140.8 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel HD Graphics 500 | no data |
| Max video memory | 8 GB | no data |
| Quick Sync Video | + | - |
| Clear Video | + | no data |
| Clear Video HD | + | no data |
| Graphics max frequency | 700 MHz | no data |
| Execution Units | 12 | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Celeron N3450 and Xeon W-3245 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 3 | no data |
| eDP | + | no data |
| DisplayPort | + | - |
| HDMI | + | - |
| MIPI-DSI | + | no data |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Celeron N3450 and Xeon W-3245 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | + | no data |
| OpenGL | + | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N3450 and Xeon W-3245.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 6 | 64 |
| USB revision | 2.0/3.0 | no data |
| Total number of SATA ports | 2 | no data |
| Number of USB ports | 8 | no data |
| Integrated LAN | - | no data |
| UART | + | no data |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.13 | 17.64 |
| Recency | 30 August 2016 | 3 June 2019 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 16 |
| Threads | 4 | 32 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6 Watt | 205 Watt |
Celeron N3450 has 3316.7% lower power consumption.
Xeon W-3245, on the other hand, has a 1461.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads.
The Intel Xeon W-3245 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron N3450 in performance tests.
Be aware that Celeron N3450 is a notebook processor while Xeon W-3245 is a server/workstation one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
