Celeron E1400 vs Xeon X5670

VS

Primary details

Comparing Xeon X5670 and Celeron E1400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1453not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.06no data
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
SeriesXeon (Desktop)no data
Power efficiency3.83no data
Architecture codenameWestmere-EP (2010−2011)Allendale (2006−2009)
Release date16 March 2010 (14 years ago)April 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$67$57

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon X5670 and Celeron E1400 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 cores6 (Hexa-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads122
Base clock speed2.93 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed3.33 GHz2 GHz
Bus rate6400 MHzno data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache256 KB (per core)512 KB (shared)
L3 cache12 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm65 nm
Die size239 mm277 mm2
Maximum core temperature81 °C73 °C
Number of transistors1,170 million105 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data0.85V-1.5V

Compatibility

Information on Xeon X5670 and Celeron E1400 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
SocketFCLGA1366,LGA1366LGA775
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon X5670 and Celeron E1400. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2no data
AES-NI+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology1.0-
Hyper-Threading Technology+-
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring-+
Demand Based Switching+-
PAE40 Bitno data
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

Xeon X5670 and Celeron E1400 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+-
EDB++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon X5670 and Celeron E1400 are enumerated here.

VT-d+-
VT-x+-
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon X5670 and Celeron E1400. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR1, DDR2, DDR3
Maximum memory size288 GBno data
Max memory channels3no data
Maximum memory bandwidth32 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon X5670 and Celeron E1400.

PCIe version2.0no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.



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.

Xeon X5670 6105
+731%
Celeron E1400 735

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.

Xeon X5670 492
+124%
Celeron E1400 220

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.

Xeon X5670 2268
+479%
Celeron E1400 392

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 6 2
Threads 12 2
Chip lithography 32 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 65 Watt

Xeon X5670 has 200% more physical cores and 500% more threads, and a 103.1% more advanced lithography process.

Celeron E1400, on the other hand, has 46.2% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Xeon X5670 and Celeron E1400. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Xeon X5670 is a server/workstation processor while Celeron E1400 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon X5670 and Celeron E1400, 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 X5670
Xeon X5670
Intel Celeron E1400
Celeron E1400

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.


4.3 475 votes

Rate Xeon X5670 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6 61 vote

Rate Celeron E1400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon X5670 or Celeron E1400, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.