Celeron N6211 vs Xeon Gold 5217

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon Gold 5217
2019
8 cores / 16 threads, 115 Watt
9.71
+589%
Celeron N6211
2022
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
1.41

Xeon Gold 5217 outperforms Celeron N6211 by a whopping 589% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon Gold 5217 and Celeron N6211 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking7842195
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation7.693.33
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Xeon GoldElkhart Lake
Power efficiency7.9920.53
Architecture codenameCascade Lake (2019−2020)Elkhart Lake (2022)
Release date2 April 2019 (5 years ago)17 July 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,522$54

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon Gold 5217 has 131% better value for money than Celeron N6211.

Detailed specifications

Xeon Gold 5217 and Celeron N6211 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads162
Base clock speed3 GHz1.2 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz3 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier30no data
L1 cache512 KBno data
L2 cache8 MB1.5 MB
L3 cache11 MBno data
Chip lithography14 nm10 nm
Maximum core temperature79 °C70 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++

Compatibility

Information on Xeon Gold 5217 and Celeron N6211 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 configuration4 (Multiprocessor)no data
SocketFCLGA3647BGA1493
Power consumption (TDP)115 Watt6.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon Gold 5217 and Celeron N6211. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512no data
AES-NI++
AVX+-
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shift+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
TSX+-
Turbo Boost Max 3.0-no data
Deep Learning Boost+-

Security technologies

Xeon Gold 5217 and Celeron N6211 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon Gold 5217 and Celeron N6211 are enumerated here.

VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon Gold 5217 and Celeron N6211. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2667DDR4
Maximum memory size1 TBno data
Max memory channels6no data
Maximum memory bandwidth128.001 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon Gold 5217 and Celeron N6211.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes48no 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. 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.

Xeon Gold 5217 9.71
+589%
Celeron N6211 1.41

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.

Xeon Gold 5217 15429
+587%
Celeron N6211 2245

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.71 1.41
Recency 2 April 2019 17 July 2022
Physical cores 8 2
Threads 16 2
Chip lithography 14 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 115 Watt 6 Watt

Xeon Gold 5217 has a 588.7% higher aggregate performance score, and 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads.

Celeron N6211, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 1816.7% lower power consumption.

The Xeon Gold 5217 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N6211 in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon Gold 5217 is a server/workstation processor while Celeron N6211 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon Gold 5217 and Celeron N6211, 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 Xeon Gold 5217
Xeon Gold 5217
Intel Celeron N6211
Celeron N6211

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.


2.3 3 votes

Rate Xeon Gold 5217 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.3 4 votes

Rate Celeron N6211 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon Gold 5217 or Celeron N6211, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.