Xeon Silver 4214R vs Celeron G1610
Aggregate performance score
Xeon Silver 4214R outperforms Celeron G1610 by a whopping 1109% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron G1610 and Xeon Silver 4214R processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2463 | 655 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.01 | 26.84 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Series | no data | Intel Xeon Silver |
| Architecture codename | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) | Cascade Lake (2019−2020) |
| Release date | 3 December 2012 (11 years ago) | 24 February 2020 (4 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $388 | $705 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Xeon Silver 4214R has 268300% better value for money than Celeron G1610.
Detailed specifications
Celeron G1610 and Xeon Silver 4214R 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) | 12 (Dodeca-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 24 |
| Base clock speed | 2.6 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.6 GHz | 3.5 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 3.0 |
| Bus rate | 5 GT/s | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 24 |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 768 KB |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 12 MB |
| L3 cache | 2 MB (shared) | 16.5 MB |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 94 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 79 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 65 °C | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron G1610 and Xeon Silver 4214R 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 | no data |
| Socket | FCLGA1155 | FCLGA3647 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 55 Watt | 100 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G1610 and Xeon Silver 4214R. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2 | Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512 |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | + |
| My WiFi | - | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | + |
| TSX | - | + |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | - |
| Status | Discontinued | Launched |
| Deep Learning Boost | - | + |
Security technologies
Celeron G1610 and Xeon Silver 4214R technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | + |
| EDB | + | + |
| Secure Key | - | no data |
| Anti-Theft | - | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron G1610 and Xeon Silver 4214R are enumerated here.
| VT-d | - | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron G1610 and Xeon Silver 4214R. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR4-2400 |
| Maximum memory size | 32 GB | 1 TB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 6 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 21 GB/s | 115.212 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | + | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel® HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel® Processors | no data |
| Graphics max frequency | 1.05 GHz | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Celeron G1610 and Xeon Silver 4214R integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 3 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron G1610 and Xeon Silver 4214R.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 48 |
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 | 0.98 | 11.85 |
| Recency | 3 December 2012 | 24 February 2020 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 12 |
| Threads | 2 | 24 |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 55 Watt | 100 Watt |
Celeron G1610 has 81.8% lower power consumption.
Xeon Silver 4214R, on the other hand, has a 1109.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, 500% more physical cores and 1100% more threads, and a 57.1% more advanced lithography process.
The Xeon Silver 4214R is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron G1610 in performance tests.
Note that Celeron G1610 is a desktop processor while Xeon Silver 4214R is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron G1610 and Xeon Silver 4214R, 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.
