Celeron N4000C vs Xeon X3430
Aggregate performance score
Xeon X3430 outperforms Celeron N4000C by an impressive 63% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Xeon X3430 and Celeron N4000C processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2119 | 2487 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Release date | 1 July 2009 (15 years ago) | 1 April 2019 (5 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Xeon X3430 and Celeron N4000C 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 | no data | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | no data | 2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 73 °C | no data |
| 64 bit support | - | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon X3430 and Celeron N4000C 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 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 6 Watt |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon X3430 and Celeron N4000C. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 21 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon X3430 and Celeron N4000C.
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 6 |
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.48 | 0.91 |
| Recency | 1 July 2009 | 1 April 2019 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 6 Watt |
Xeon X3430 has a 62.6% higher aggregate performance score.
Celeron N4000C, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 9 years, and 1483.3% lower power consumption.
The Xeon X3430 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N4000C in performance tests.
Be aware that Xeon X3430 is a server/workstation processor while Celeron N4000C is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon X3430 and Celeron N4000C, 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.
