Xeon w9-3595X vs Celeron M U3400

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron M U3400
2010
2 cores / 2 threads, 18 Watt
0.29
Xeon w9-3595X
2024
60 cores / 120 threads, 385 Watt
62.95
+21607%

Xeon w9-3595X outperforms Celeron M U3400 by a whopping 21607% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M U3400 and Xeon w9-3595X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking312113
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data20.42
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesIntel Celeron Mno data
Power efficiency1.5215.39
Architecture codenameArrandale (2010−2011)Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024)
Release date24 May 2010 (14 years ago)24 August 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$5,889

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron M U3400 and Xeon w9-3595X 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)60 (Hexaconta-Core)
Threads2120
Base clock speedno data2 GHz
Boost clock speed1.06 GHz4.8 GHz
Bus rate2500 MHzno data
L1 cacheno data80 KB (per core)
L2 cache512 KB2 MB (per core)
L3 cache2 MB112.5 MB
Chip lithography32 nmIntel 7 nm
Die size81+114 mm24x 477 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data81 °C
Number of transistors382+177 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M U3400 and Xeon w9-3595X 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 configurationno data1
SocketBGA1288FCLGA4677
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt385 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M U3400 and Xeon w9-3595X. 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-+
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data+
Fast Memory Access+no data
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Celeron M U3400 and Xeon w9-3595X technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDB++
SGXno data-
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M U3400 and Xeon w9-3595X are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-x++
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M U3400 and Xeon w9-3595X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR5-4800
Maximum memory sizeno data4 TB
Max memory channelsno data8
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M U3400 and Xeon w9-3595X.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanesno data112

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.29 62.95
Recency 24 May 2010 24 August 2024
Physical cores 2 60
Threads 2 120
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 385 Watt

Celeron M U3400 has 2038.9% lower power consumption.

Xeon w9-3595X, on the other hand, has a 21606.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, and 2900% more physical cores and 5900% more threads.

The Xeon w9-3595X is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron M U3400 in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron M U3400 is a notebook processor while Xeon w9-3595X is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M U3400 and Xeon w9-3595X, 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 M U3400
Celeron M U3400
Intel Xeon w9-3595X
Xeon w9-3595X

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.


2.8 4 votes

Rate Celeron M U3400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 41 vote

Rate Xeon w9-3595X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M U3400 or Xeon w9-3595X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.