Xeon Gold 6442Y vs Celeron T3500

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron T3500
2010
35 Watt
0.43
Xeon Gold 6442Y
2023, $2,065
24 cores / 48 threads, 225 Watt
33.19
+7619%

Xeon Gold 6442Y outperforms Celeron T3500 by a whopping 7619% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking3198140
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data17.48
Market segmentLaptopServer
Power efficiency1.3215.82
DesignerIntelIntel
Manufacturerno dataIntel
Architecture codenameno dataSapphire Rapids (2023−2024)
Release date1 July 2010 (15 years ago)10 January 2023 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$2,065

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Detailed specifications

Celeron T3500 and Xeon Gold 6442Y 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 coresno data24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Threadsno data48
Base clock speed2.1 GHz2.6 GHz
Boost clock speedno data4 GHz
L1 cacheno data80K (per core)
L2 cacheno data2 MB (per core)
L3 cache1 MB60 MB
Chip lithography45 nmIntel 7 nm
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data79 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron T3500 and Xeon Gold 6442Y 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 data2
SocketPGA478FCLGA4677
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt225 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron T3500 and Xeon Gold 6442Y. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® AMX, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2.0
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
TSX-+
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Celeron T3500 and Xeon Gold 6442Y technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
SGXno dataYes with Intel® SPS
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron T3500 and Xeon Gold 6442Y are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron T3500 and Xeon Gold 6442Y. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR5-4800, DDR5-4400
Maximum memory sizeno data4 TB
Max memory channelsno data8
ECC memory support-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron T3500 and Xeon Gold 6442Y.

PCIe versionno data5
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 T3500 0.43
Xeon Gold 6442Y 33.19
+7619%

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 T3500 764
Samples: 241
Xeon Gold 6442Y 58534
+7562%
Samples: 21

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.

Celeron T3500 231
Xeon Gold 6442Y 1954
+746%

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.

Celeron T3500 333
Xeon Gold 6442Y 17122
+5042%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.43 33.19
Recency 1 July 2010 10 January 2023
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 225 Watt

Celeron T3500 has 542.9% lower power consumption.

Xeon Gold 6442Y, on the other hand, has a 7618.6% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 12 years.

The Intel Xeon Gold 6442Y is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron T3500 in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron T3500 is a notebook processor while Xeon Gold 6442Y 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 T3500
Celeron T3500
Intel Xeon Gold 6442Y
Xeon Gold 6442Y

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.


4 8 votes

Rate Celeron T3500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 10 votes

Rate Xeon Gold 6442Y on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about processors Celeron T3500 and Xeon Gold 6442Y, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report bugs or inaccuracies on the site.