Xeon 6960P vs Celeron 2.0
Primary details
Comparing Celeron 2.0 and Xeon 6960P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Architecture codename | Northwood (2002−2004) | Granite Rapids (2024) |
| Release date | September 2002 (22 years ago) | 24 September 2024 (less than a year ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron 2.0 and Xeon 6960P 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 | 1 (Single-Core) | 72 (Doheptaconta-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 144 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.7 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2 GHz | 3.9 GHz |
| L1 cache | 8 KB | 112 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 128 KB | 2 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 432 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 5 nm |
| Die size | 146 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 80 °C |
| Number of transistors | 55 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron 2.0 and Xeon 6960P 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 | 2 |
| Socket | 478 | 7529 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 73 Watt | 500 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 2.0 and Xeon 6960P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| TSX | - | + |
Security technologies
Celeron 2.0 and Xeon 6960P technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 2.0 and Xeon 6960P are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 2.0 and Xeon 6960P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1, DDR2 | DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 2.0 and Xeon 6960P.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 96 |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 1 | 72 |
| Threads | 1 | 144 |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 73 Watt | 500 Watt |
Celeron 2.0 has 584.9% lower power consumption.
Xeon 6960P, on the other hand, has 7100% more physical cores and 14300% more threads, and a 2500% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Celeron 2.0 and Xeon 6960P. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Celeron 2.0 is a desktop processor while Xeon 6960P is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 2.0 and Xeon 6960P, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
