Xeon E-2478 vs Celeron Dual-Core T3300

Aggregate performance score

Celeron Dual-Core T3300
2010
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.40
Xeon E-2478
2023
8 cores / 16 threads, 80 Watt
18.78
+4595%

Xeon E-2478 outperforms Celeron Dual-Core T3300 by a whopping 4595% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron Dual-Core T3300 and Xeon E-2478 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2991313
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data82.67
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesIntel Celeron Dual-Coreno data
Power efficiency1.0822.22
Architecture codenamePenryn (2008−2011)Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)
Release date1 February 2010 (14 years ago)14 December 2023 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$568

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron Dual-Core T3300 and Xeon E-2478 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)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads216
Base clock speedno data2.8 GHz
Boost clock speed2 GHz5.2 GHz
Bus rate800 MHz16 GT/s
L1 cache128 KB80 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB2 MB (per core)
L3 cacheno data24 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nmIntel 7 nm
Die sizeno data257 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron Dual-Core T3300 and Xeon E-2478 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
SocketSocket P 478FCLGA1700
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt80 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron Dual-Core T3300 and Xeon E-2478. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data+

Security technologies

Celeron Dual-Core T3300 and Xeon E-2478 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDB++
Secure Keyno data+
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron Dual-Core T3300 and Xeon E-2478 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron Dual-Core T3300 and Xeon E-2478. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR5-4800
Maximum memory sizeno data128 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
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 Dual-Core T3300 and Xeon E-2478.

PCIe versionno data5
PCI Express lanesno data16

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.

Celeron Dual-Core T3300 0.40
Xeon E-2478 18.78
+4595%

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.

Celeron Dual-Core T3300 633
Xeon E-2478 29827
+4612%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.40 18.78
Recency 1 February 2010 14 December 2023
Physical cores 2 8
Threads 2 16
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 80 Watt

Celeron Dual-Core T3300 has 128.6% lower power consumption.

Xeon E-2478, on the other hand, has a 4595% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, and 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads.

The Xeon E-2478 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron Dual-Core T3300 in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron Dual-Core T3300 is a notebook processor while Xeon E-2478 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron Dual-Core T3300 and Xeon E-2478, 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 Dual-Core T3300
Celeron Dual-Core T3300
Intel Xeon E-2478
Xeon E-2478

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.


2.5 48 votes

Rate Celeron Dual-Core T3300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Xeon E-2478 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron Dual-Core T3300 or Xeon E-2478, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.