Key Differences
In short — Ryzen Threadripper 2920X outperforms the cheaper Celeron G1840 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Celeron G1840 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Ryzen Threadripper 2920X is 1616 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G1840.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1840
- Up to 96% cheaper than Ryzen Threadripper 2920X - CA$41.21 vs CA$988.79
- Up to 95% better value when playing Overwatch 2 than Ryzen Threadripper 2920X - CA$0.13 vs CA$2.84 per FPS
- Consumes up to 71% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X - 53 vs 180 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X
- Performs up to 9% better in Overwatch 2 than Celeron G1840 - 348 vs 319 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1840 - 24 vs 2 threads
Overwatch 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Desktop • May 1st, 2014
FPS
319
91%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$0.13/FPS
100%
Price, CA$
CA$41.21
100%
Value Winner
Buy for CA$41.21 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 161 minutes ago
Desktop • Oct 3rd, 2018
FPS
348
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$2.84/FPS
4%
Price, CA$
CA$988.79
4%
FPS Winner
Buy for CA$988.79 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 162 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Desktop • May 1st, 2014
Desktop • Oct 3rd, 2018
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron G1840 | vs | AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X |
---|---|---|
May 1st, 2014 | Release Date | Oct 3rd, 2018 |
Celeron | Collection | Ryzen Threadripper |
Haswell | Codename | Colfax |
Intel Socket 1150 | Socket | AMD Socket SP3r2 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 12 |
2 | Threads | 24 |
2.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.3 GHz |
53 W | TDP | 180 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 12 nm |
28.0x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
Intel HD (Haswell) | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |