Key Differences
In short — Ryzen Threadripper 1900X 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 Threadripper 1900X is 1732 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1620
- Up to 89% cheaper than Ryzen Threadripper 1900X - CA$32.99 vs CA$303.46
- Consumes up to 69% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X - 55 vs 180 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X
- Performs up to 10% better in Sons Of The Forest than Celeron G1620 - 99 vs 90 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 16 vs 2 threads
Sons Of The Forest
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Buy for CA$32.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 75659 minutes ago
Desktop • Aug 31st, 2017
FPS
99
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
Price, CA$
CA$303.46
10%
FPS Winner
Buy for CA$303.46 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 75660 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Desktop • Aug 31st, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
409
35.01712328767123%
Multi-Core
723
12.478425957887469%
Intel Celeron G1620 | vs | AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X |
---|---|---|
Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Aug 31st, 2017 |
Celeron | Collection | Ryzen Threadripper |
Ivy Bridge | Codename | Whitehaven |
Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | AMD Socket SP3r2 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 8 |
2 | Threads | 16 |
2.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.8 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.0 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 180 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
27.0x | Multiplier | 38.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |