Buy on Amazon
CA$32.99
In Stock
Availability
Availability
AvailabilityMSRP in USD: $329
Availability
MSRP in USD: $329
Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 7 2700X outperforms the cheaper Celeron G1620 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Ryzen 7 2700X is 1963 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1620
- Up to 85% cheaper than Ryzen 7 2700X - CA$32.99 vs CA$220.0
- Consumes up to 48% less energy than AMD Ryzen 7 2700X - 55 vs 105 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen 7 2700X doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
- Performs up to 9% better in Overwatch 2 than Celeron G1620 - 344 vs 316 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 16 vs 2 threads
Overwatch 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Intel Celeron G1620 CPU Used 2-Core 2-Thread Desktop Processor 2.7 GHz 2M 55W LGA1155
Buy for CA$32.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 75472 minutes ago
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X Processor with Wraith Prism LED Cooler - YD270XBGAFBOX
Buy for CA$220 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 75473 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Celeron G1620
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Ryzen 7 2700X
Desktop • Apr 19th, 2018
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Celeron G1620
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
409
32.85140562248996%
Multi-Core
723
11.827253394405366%
Intel Celeron G1620 | vs | AMD Ryzen 7 2700X |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Apr 19th, 2018 |
| Celeron | Collection | Ryzen 7 |
| Ivy Bridge | Codename | Pinnacle Ridge |
| Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | AMD Socket AM4 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| 2 | Cores | 8 |
| 2 | Threads | 16 |
| 2.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.7 GHz |
| Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.3 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 105 W |
| 22 nm | Process Size | 12 nm |
| 27.0x | Multiplier | 37.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | Yes |
Similar CPU Comparisons
Select from the most popular similar processor comparisons. Most compared processor combinations, including the currently selected ones, are at the top.
