Xeon E-2314 vs Celeron 4205U
Aggregate performance score
Xeon E-2314 outperforms Celeron 4205U by a whopping 500% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron 4205U and Xeon E-2314 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2579 | 1213 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | Intel Celeron | no data |
| Power efficiency | 5.40 | 7.48 |
| Architecture codename | Whiskey Lake-U (2018−2019) | Rocket Lake-E (2021) |
| Release date | 23 January 2019 (5 years ago) | 8 September 2021 (3 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $107 | no data |
Detailed specifications
Celeron 4205U and Xeon E-2314 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.8 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.8 GHz | 4.5 GHz |
| Bus type | OPI | no data |
| Bus rate | 4 GT/s | 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | 18 | no data |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 2 MB (shared) | 8 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 10 nm | 14 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | 100 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 72 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron 4205U and Xeon E-2314 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 (Uniprocessor) | 1 |
| Socket | Intel BGA 1528 | FCLGA1200 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 4205U and Xeon E-2314. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
Security technologies
Celeron 4205U and Xeon E-2314 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| MPX | - | + |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® SPS |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 4205U and Xeon E-2314 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 4205U and Xeon E-2314. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3, DDR4 | DDR4-3200 |
| Maximum memory size | 32 GB | 128 GB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 38.397 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel HD Graphics 610 (300 - 900 MHz) | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 4205U and Xeon E-2314.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 12 | 44 |
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.
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.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.85 | 5.10 |
| Recency | 23 January 2019 | 8 September 2021 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 4 |
| Threads | 2 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 10 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 65 Watt |
Celeron 4205U has a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 333.3% lower power consumption.
Xeon E-2314, on the other hand, has a 500% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
The Xeon E-2314 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 4205U in performance tests.
Be aware that Celeron 4205U is a notebook processor while Xeon E-2314 is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 4205U and Xeon E-2314, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
