Key Differences
In short — Ryzen Threadripper 3970X outperforms Celeron G1610 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Ryzen Threadripper 3970X is 2548 days newer than Celeron G1610.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610
- Consumes up to 80% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X - 55 vs 280 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X
- Performs up to 7% better in Battlefield 1 than Celeron G1610 - 245 vs 229 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 64 vs 2 threads
Battlefield 1
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Nov 25th, 2019
FPS
245
100%
Value, €/FPS
Price, €
€2339.63
100%
FPS Winner
Buy for €2,339.63 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 77135 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Desktop • Nov 25th, 2019
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
426
26.03911980440098%
Multi-Core
739
5.275556824671616%
Intel Celeron G1610 | vs | AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X |
---|---|---|
Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Nov 25th, 2019 |
Celeron | Collection | Ryzen Threadripper |
Ivy Bridge | Codename | Castle Peak |
Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | AMD Socket TRX4 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 32 |
2 | Threads | 64 |
2.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.7 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.5 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 280 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 7 nm |
26.0x | Multiplier | 37.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |