Key Differences
In short — Core i9-7900X outperforms Celeron G1620 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i9-7900X is 1666 days newer than Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1620
- Consumes up to 61% less energy than Intel Core i9-7900X - 55 vs 140 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i9-7900X doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Core i9-7900X
- Performs up to 13% better in Battlefield IV than Celeron G1620 - 415 vs 368 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 20 vs 2 threads
Battlefield IV
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Buy for CA$32.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 76581 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Desktop • Jun 26th, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
409
28.76230661040788%
Multi-Core
723
8.233686368295183%
Intel Celeron G1620 | vs | Intel Core i9-7900X |
---|---|---|
Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Jun 26th, 2017 |
Celeron | Collection | Core i9 |
Ivy Bridge | Codename | Skylake-E/EP |
Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | Intel Socket 2066 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 10 |
2 | Threads | 20 |
2.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.3 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.3 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 140 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
27.0x | Multiplier | 33.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |