Celeron 1017U vs Xeon E5-2680 v4

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

Xeon E5-2680 v4
2016
14 cores / 28 threads
11.51
+1087%

Xeon E5-2680 v4 outperforms Celeron 1017U by a whopping 1087% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon E5-2680 v4 and Celeron 1017U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking6122368
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation28.10no data
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
SeriesIntel Xeon (Desktop)Intel Celeron
Architecture codenameBroadwell-EP (2016)Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
Release date10 March 2016 (8 years ago)1 July 2013 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,745no data
Current price$126 (0.1x MSRP)$299

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon E5-2680 v4 and Celeron 1017U 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 cores14 (Tetradeca-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads282
Base clock speed2.4 GHz1.6 GHz
Boost clock speed3.3 GHz1.6 GHz
Bus support9.6 GT/s / QPIno data
L1 cache448 KB128 KB
L2 cache3.5 MB512 KB
L3 cache35 MB2 MB
Chip lithography14 nm22 nm
Die size306 mm294 mm2
Maximum core temperature86 °C105 °C
Number of transistors4700 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Xeon E5-2680 v4 and Celeron 1017U 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 configuration21
SocketFCLGA2011FCBGA1023
Power consumption (TDP)120 Watt17 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E5-2680 v4 and Celeron 1017U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVX2Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI+-
AVX+no data
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
My WiFino data-
Turbo Boost Technology2.0-
Hyper-Threading Technology+-
TSX+no data
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Flex Memory Access-+
Demand Based Switching+-
PAE46 Bitno data
FDIno data+
Fast Memory Accessno data+
StatusLaunchedDiscontinued

Security technologies

Xeon E5-2680 v4 and Celeron 1017U technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+-
EDB++
Secure Key+no data
Identity Protection-no data
OS Guard+no data
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E5-2680 v4 and Celeron 1017U are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E5-2680 v4 and Celeron 1017U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133, DDR4-2400DDR3
Maximum memory size1.5 TB32 GB
Max memory channels42
Maximum memory bandwidth76.8 GB/s25.6 GB/s
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel® HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel® Processors
Graphics max frequencyno data1 GHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Xeon E5-2680 v4 and Celeron 1017U integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPortno data+
HDMIno data+
SDVOno data+
CRTno data+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E5-2680 v4 and Celeron 1017U.

PCIe version3.02.0
PCI Express lanes4016

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.

Xeon E5-2680 v4 11.51
+1087%
Celeron 1017U 0.97

Xeon E5-2680 v4 outperforms Celeron 1017U by 1087% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

Xeon E5-2680 v4 17799
+1080%
Celeron 1017U 1508

Xeon E5-2680 v4 outperforms Celeron 1017U by 1080% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Xeon E5-2680 v4 1009
+272%
Celeron 1017U 271

Xeon E5-2680 v4 outperforms Celeron 1017U by 272% in GeekBench 5 Single-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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Xeon E5-2680 v4 6968
+1402%
Celeron 1017U 464

Xeon E5-2680 v4 outperforms Celeron 1017U by 1402% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

Xeon E5-2680 v4 3707
+68.4%
Celeron 1017U 2201

Xeon E5-2680 v4 outperforms Celeron 1017U by 68% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Xeon E5-2680 v4 30922
+644%
Celeron 1017U 4155

Xeon E5-2680 v4 outperforms Celeron 1017U by 644% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Xeon E5-2680 v4 8286
+382%
Celeron 1017U 1719

Xeon E5-2680 v4 outperforms Celeron 1017U by 382% in 3DMark06 CPU.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

Xeon E5-2680 v4 18
+1258%
Celeron 1017U 1

Xeon E5-2680 v4 outperforms Celeron 1017U by 1258% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

Xeon E5-2680 v4 1.13
+85.2%
Celeron 1017U 0.61

Xeon E5-2680 v4 outperforms Celeron 1017U by 85% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Xeon E5-2680 v4 9.4
+6614%
Celeron 1017U 0.1

Xeon E5-2680 v4 outperforms Celeron 1017U by 6614% in TrueCrypt AES.

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Xeon E5-2680 v4 6323
+450%
Celeron 1017U 1150

Xeon E5-2680 v4 outperforms Celeron 1017U by 450% in WinRAR 4.0.

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Xeon E5-2680 v4 137
+226%
Celeron 1017U 42

Xeon E5-2680 v4 outperforms Celeron 1017U by 226% in x264 encoding pass 1.

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Xeon E5-2680 v4 79
+945%
Celeron 1017U 8

Xeon E5-2680 v4 outperforms Celeron 1017U by 945% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

Xeon E5-2680 v4 2275
+66.4%
Celeron 1017U 1367

Xeon E5-2680 v4 outperforms Celeron 1017U by 66% in Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core.

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

Xeon E5-2680 v4 26961
+1068%
Celeron 1017U 2308

Xeon E5-2680 v4 outperforms Celeron 1017U by 1068% in Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.51 0.97
Recency 10 March 2016 1 July 2013
Physical cores 14 2
Threads 28 2
Chip lithography 14 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 120 Watt 17 Watt

The Xeon E5-2680 v4 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 1017U in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon E5-2680 v4 is a server/workstation processor while Celeron 1017U is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E5-2680 v4 and Celeron 1017U, 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 Xeon E5-2680 v4
Xeon E5-2680 v4
Intel Celeron 1017U
Celeron 1017U

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.


4.5 3011 votes

Rate Xeon E5-2680 v4 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 65 votes

Rate Celeron 1017U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon E5-2680 v4 or Celeron 1017U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.