Xeon D-2796TE vs Celeron E3400
Aggregate performance score
Xeon D-2796TE outperforms Celeron E3400 by a whopping 2824% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3107 | 522 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 3.72 | 5.39 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Power efficiency | 0.33 | 5.38 |
| Designer | Intel | Intel |
| Manufacturer | Intel | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Wolfdale (2008−2010) | Ice Lake-D (2022−2023) |
| Release date | 17 January 2010 (15 years ago) | 24 February 2022 (3 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $76 | $2,101 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Xeon D-2796TE has 45% better value for money than Celeron E3400.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Celeron E3400 and Xeon D-2796TE 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) | 20 (Icosa-Core) |
| Performance-cores | no data | 20 |
| Threads | 2 | 40 |
| Base clock speed | 2.6 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.6 GHz | 3.1 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (shared) | 1.25 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 30 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 10 nm |
| Die size | 82 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 74 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 228 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| VID voltage range | 0.85V-1.3625V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron E3400 and Xeon D-2796TE 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 | 1 |
| Socket | LGA775 | FCBGA2579 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 118 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron E3400 and Xeon D-2796TE. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® AVX-512 |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| QuickAssist | no data | - |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | + |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | + |
| Deep Learning Boost | - | + |
Security technologies
Celeron E3400 and Xeon D-2796TE technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | + |
| EDB | + | + |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® SPS |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron E3400 and Xeon D-2796TE are enumerated here.
| VT-d | - | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron E3400 and Xeon D-2796TE. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 1 TB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 4 |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
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 E3400 and Xeon D-2796TE.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 32 |
| USB revision | no data | 3.0 |
| Total number of SATA ports | no data | 24 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 4 |
| Integrated LAN | no data | + |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.51 | 14.91 |
| Recency | 17 January 2010 | 24 February 2022 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 20 |
| Threads | 2 | 40 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 118 Watt |
Celeron E3400 has 81.5% lower power consumption.
Xeon D-2796TE, on the other hand, has a 2823.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, 900% more physical cores and 1900% more threads, and a 350% more advanced lithography process.
The Intel Xeon D-2796TE is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron E3400 in performance tests.
Note that Celeron E3400 is a desktop processor while Xeon D-2796TE 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.
