Xeon w5-2545 vs Celeron G3900E

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron G3900E
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
1.28
Xeon w5-2545
2024
12 cores / 24 threads, 210 Watt
26.24
+1950%

Xeon w5-2545 outperforms Celeron G3900E by a whopping 1950% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron G3900E and Xeon w5-2545 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2291188
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.1883.24
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesIntel Celeronno data
Power efficiency3.4611.82
Architecture codenameSkylake (2015−2016)Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024)
Release date2 January 2016 (8 years ago)24 August 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107$889

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon w5-2545 has 46144% better value for money than Celeron G3900E.

Detailed specifications

Celeron G3900E and Xeon w5-2545 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 cores2 (Dual-core)12 (Dodeca-Core)
Threads224
Base clock speedno data3.5 GHz
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz4.7 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier24no data
L1 cache128 KB80 KB (per core)
L2 cache512 KB2 MB (per core)
L3 cache2 MB30 MB
Chip lithography14 nmIntel 7 nm
Die size98.57 mm2no data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data74 °C
Number of transistors1750 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron G3900E and Xeon w5-2545 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
Socketno dataFCLGA4677
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt210 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G3900E and Xeon w5-2545. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® AMX, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512
AES-NI++
AVX-+
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2.0
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
TSX-+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data+
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Celeron G3900E and Xeon w5-2545 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
SGXno data-
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron G3900E and Xeon w5-2545 are enumerated here.

VT-d++
VT-x++
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron G3900E and Xeon w5-2545. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesLPDDR3-1866DDR5-4800
Maximum memory size64 GB2 TB
Max memory channels24
Maximum memory bandwidth34.134 GB/sno data
ECC memory support++

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics 510N/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron G3900E and Xeon w5-2545.

PCIe version3.05.0
PCI Express lanes1664

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Celeron G3900E 1.28
Xeon w5-2545 26.24
+1950%

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.

Celeron G3900E 2034
Xeon w5-2545 41688
+1950%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.28 26.24
Recency 2 January 2016 24 August 2024
Physical cores 2 12
Threads 2 24
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 210 Watt

Celeron G3900E has 500% lower power consumption.

Xeon w5-2545, on the other hand, has a 1950% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and 500% more physical cores and 1100% more threads.

The Xeon w5-2545 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron G3900E in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron G3900E is a notebook processor while Xeon w5-2545 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron G3900E and Xeon w5-2545, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Celeron G3900E
Celeron G3900E
Intel Xeon w5-2545
Xeon w5-2545

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


2 1 vote

Rate Celeron G3900E on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 2 votes

Rate Xeon w5-2545 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron G3900E or Xeon w5-2545, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.