| | | | | | |

Celeron G1610T vs Xeon E5-2670 v3


Description
The G1610T is based on Ivy Bridge architecture while the E5-2670 v3 is based on Haswell.

Using the multithread performance as a reference, the G1610T gets a score of 38.6 k points while the E5-2670 v3 gets 325.8 k points.

Summarizing, the E5-2670 v3 is 8.4 times faster than the G1610T . To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.

Specs
CPUID
306a9
306f2
Core
Ivy Bridge
Haswell-EP
Architecture
Base frecuency
2.3 GHz
2.3 GHz
Boost frecuency
2.3 GHz
3.1 GHz
Socket
LGA 1155
LGA 2011-3
Cores/Threads
2/2
12/24
TDP
35 W
120 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
32+32 kB
12x32+12x32 kB
Cache L2
256 kB
12x256 kB
Cache L3
2048 kB
30720 kB
Date
December 2012
September 2014
Mean monothread perf.
20.84k points
36.41k points
Mean multithread perf.
38.59k points
452.9k points

Non-optimized benchmark
The benchmark in Mode 0 (FPU) measures cpu performance with non-optimized software. It uses the basic µinstructions from the i386 architecture with the i387 floating point unit. This mode is compatible with all CPUs so it's practical to compare very different CPUs
Monothread
G1610T
E5-2670 v3
Test#1 (Integers)
2.34k
3.52k (x1.5)
Test#2 (FP)
6.54k
8.68k (x1.33)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
3k
2.83k (x0.94)
Test#1 (Memory)
2.74k
3.13k (x1.14)
TOTAL
14.62k
18.17k (x1.24)

Multithread

G1610T

E5-2670 v3
Test#1 (Integers)
4.67k
32.7k (x7.01)
Test#2 (FP)
12.66k
105.18k (x8.31)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.95k
35.18k (x5.91)
Test#1 (Memory)
2.53k
9.54k (x3.78)
TOTAL
25.8k
182.59k (x7.08)

SSE3 optimized benchmark
The benchmark in mode I (SSE) is optimized for the use of SIMD instructions with 128 bits register and the SSE set up to version 3. Nearly every modern CPU has support for this mode.
Monothread
G1610T
E5-2670 v3
Test#1 (Integers)
7.87k
11.08k (x1.41)
Test#2 (FP)
7.14k
9.57k (x1.34)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
3.04k
3.18k (x1.05)
Test#1 (Memory)
2.79k
3.28k (x1.18)
TOTAL
20.84k
27.11k (x1.3)

Multithread

G1610T

E5-2670 v3
Test#1 (Integers)
15.12k
139.07k (x9.2)
Test#2 (FP)
14.05k
133.47k (x9.5)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.94k
46.6k (x7.85)
Test#1 (Memory)
3.48k
6.65k (x1.91)
TOTAL
38.59k
325.78k (x8.44)

Performance/W
G1610T
E5-2670 v3
Test#1 (Integers)
432 points/W
1159 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
401 points/W
1112 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
170 points/W
388 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
99 points/W
55 points/W
TOTAL
1103 points/W
2715 points/W

Performance/GHz
G1610T
E5-2670 v3
Test#1 (Integers)
3423 points/GHz
3573 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
3102 points/GHz
3087 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1323 points/GHz
1027 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
1211 points/GHz
1059 points/GHz
TOTAL
9060 points/GHz
8745 points/GHz

Monothread performance graph
Monothread performance graphics gives the performance vs time. They are useful to measure the time it takes to the CPU to reach the maximum performance.

Usually, CPU's performance will be steady during these tests but if it has a slow frequency strategy, the first samples will show a lower score.


Test#1 (Integers) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#2 (FP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#3 (Generic, ZIP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#1 (Memory) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com

Multithread performance graph
Multithread graphs measure the performance against a heavy load during certain time.

If CPU's TDP doesn't limit the frequency and the machine is properly cooled, performance should remain steady vs time. Otherwise, the performance score will oscillate or decrease over time.


Test#1 (Integers) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#2 (FP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#3 (Generic, ZIP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#1 (Memory) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com

Hardlimit Benchmark Central - Ver. 3.11.4