Key Differences
In short — Core i9-10900K 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 Core i9-10900K is 2705 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1620
- Up to 95% cheaper than Core i9-10900K - CA$32.99 vs CA$699.99
- Consumes up to 56% less energy than Intel Core i9-10900K - 55 vs 125 Watts
Advantages of Intel Core i9-10900K
- Performs up to 8% better in Battlefield 1 than Celeron G1620 - 247 vs 228 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 20 vs 2 threads
Battlefield 1
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Buy for CA$32.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 285 minutes ago
Buy for CA$699.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 285 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
409
23.38479130931961%
Multi-Core
723
7.890428898832261%
Intel Celeron G1620 | vs | Intel Core i9-10900K |
---|---|---|
Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Apr 30th, 2020 |
Celeron | Collection | Core i9 |
Ivy Bridge | Codename | Comet Lake |
Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 10 |
2 | Threads | 20 |
2.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.7 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.3 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 125 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
27.0x | Multiplier | 37.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 630 |
No | Overclockable | Yes |