Xeon Gold 6434 vs Celeron G1630

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron G1630
2013, $80
2 cores / 2 threads, 55 Watt
0.97
Xeon Gold 6434
2023, $2,607
8 cores / 16 threads, 195 Watt
15.94
+1543%

Xeon Gold 6434 outperforms Celeron G1630 by a whopping 1543% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2700478
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.085.29
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Power efficiency1.898.76
DesignerIntelIntel
ManufacturerIntelIntel
Architecture codenameIvy Bridge (2012−2013)Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024)
Release date1 September 2013 (12 years ago)10 January 2023 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$80$2,607

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon Gold 6434 has 6513% better value for money than Celeron G1630.

Performance to price scatter graph

Detailed specifications

Celeron G1630 and Xeon Gold 6434 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 speed2.8 GHz3.7 GHz
Boost clock speed2.8 GHz4.1 GHz
Bus rate5 GT/sno data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)80K (per core)
L2 cache256 KB (per core)2 MB (per core)
L3 cache2 MB (shared)22.5 MB
Chip lithography22 nmIntel 7 nm
Die size94 mm2no data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)65 °C64 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron G1630 and Xeon Gold 6434 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 configuration12
SocketFCLGA1155FCLGA4677
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt195 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G1630 and Xeon Gold 6434. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2Intel® AMX, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512
AES-NI-+
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data+
My WiFi-no data
Turbo Boost Technology-2.0
Hyper-Threading Technology-+
TSX-+
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Celeron G1630 and Xeon Gold 6434 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-+
EDB++
SGXno dataYes with Intel® SPS
OS Guardno data+
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron G1630 and Xeon Gold 6434 are enumerated here.

VT-d-+
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron G1630 and Xeon Gold 6434. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR5-4800, DDR5-4400
Maximum memory size32 GB4 TB
Max memory channels28
Maximum memory bandwidth21 GB/sno data
ECC memory support++

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel Processorsno data
Graphics max frequency1.05 GHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron G1630 and Xeon Gold 6434 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron G1630 and Xeon Gold 6434.

PCIe version2.05
PCI Express lanesno data80

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.

Celeron G1630 0.97
Xeon Gold 6434 15.94
+1543%

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.

Celeron G1630 1707
Samples: 35
Xeon Gold 6434 28111
+1547%
Samples: 6

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.97 15.94
Recency 1 September 2013 10 January 2023
Physical cores 2 8
Threads 2 16
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 195 Watt

Celeron G1630 has 254.5% lower power consumption.

Xeon Gold 6434, on the other hand, has a 1543.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, and 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads.

The Intel Xeon Gold 6434 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron G1630 in performance tests.

Note that Celeron G1630 is a desktop processor while Xeon Gold 6434 is a server/workstation one.

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 G1630
Celeron G1630
Intel Xeon Gold 6434
Xeon Gold 6434

Other comparisons

We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.2 29 votes

Rate Celeron G1630 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 1 vote

Rate Xeon Gold 6434 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about processors Celeron G1630 and Xeon Gold 6434, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report bugs or inaccuracies on the site.