Xeon 3.2 vs Celeron 2.8 GHz
Contents
Primary details
Comparing 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 | Laptop | Server |
| Designer | Intel | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Northwood (2002−2004) | Irwindale (2004) |
| Release date | no data | June 2004 (21 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Basic parameters of Celeron 2.8 GHz and Xeon 3.2: 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) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 1 |
| Boost clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 3.2 GHz |
| Bus rate | 400 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | no data | 16 KB |
| L2 cache | no data | 2 MB |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 90 nm |
| Die size | no data | 169 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | no data | 178 million |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron 2.8 GHz and Xeon 3.2 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 | no data | 1 |
| Socket | no data | 604 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 52.8 Watt | 135 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 2.8 GHz and Xeon 3.2. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
Pros & cons summary
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 52 Watt | 135 Watt |
Celeron 2.8 GHz has 160% lower power consumption.
Xeon 3.2, on the other hand, has a 44% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Intel Celeron 2.8 GHz and Intel Xeon 3.2. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Celeron 2.8 GHz is a notebook processor while Xeon 3.2 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.
