Buy on Amazon
€75.65
In Stock
Availability
Availability
No items available
AvailabilityMSRP in USD: $129
Availability
MSRP in USD: $129
Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 3 1300X outperforms Celeron G1610 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Ryzen 3 1300X is 1697 days newer than Celeron G1610.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610
- Consumes up to 15% less energy than AMD Ryzen 3 1300X - 55 vs 65 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen 3 1300X doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 3 1300X
- Performs up to 12% better in Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 than Celeron G1610 - 101 vs 90 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 4 vs 2 threads
Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
LANCHY AMD Ryzen 3 1300X CPU verwendet 4-Core 4-Thread Desktop-Prozessor 3,5 GHz 8M 65W Sockel AM4
Buy for €75.65 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 330 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Celeron G1610
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Ryzen 3 1300X
Desktop • Jul 27th, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Celeron G1610
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
426
38.833181403828625%
Multi-Core
739
23.408299018055114%
Intel Celeron G1610 | vs | AMD Ryzen 3 1300X |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Jul 27th, 2017 |
| Celeron | Collection | Ryzen 3 |
| Ivy Bridge | Codename | Summit Ridge |
| Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | AMD Socket AM4 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| 2 | Cores | 4 |
| 2 | Threads | 4 |
| 2.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
| Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.7 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 65 W |
| 22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
| 26.0x | Multiplier | 34.0x |
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.
