Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 9 5900 outperforms Celeron G1610 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Ryzen 9 5900 is 2962 days newer than Celeron G1610.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610
- Consumes up to 15% less energy than AMD Ryzen 9 5900 - 55 vs 65 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen 9 5900 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 9 5900
- Performs up to 21% better in Battlefield IV than Celeron G1610 - 446 vs 369 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 24 vs 2 threads
Battlefield IV
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Celeron G1610
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Ryzen 9 5900
Desktop • Jan 12th, 2021
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Celeron G1610
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
426
20.760233918128655%
Multi-Core
739
7.49113025848961%
Intel Celeron G1610 | vs | AMD Ryzen 9 5900 |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Jan 12th, 2021 |
| Celeron | Collection | Ryzen 9 |
| Ivy Bridge | Codename | Vermeer |
| Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | AMD Socket AM4 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| 2 | Cores | 12 |
| 2 | Threads | 24 |
| 2.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.0 GHz |
| Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.7 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 65 W |
| 22 nm | Process Size | 7 nm |
| 26.0x | Multiplier | 30.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | Yes |
