Key Differences
In short — FX-8350 outperforms the cheaper Celeron G1620 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Celeron G1620 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing FX-8350 is 41 days older than the cheaper Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1620
- Up to 87% cheaper than FX-8350 - €20.16 vs €155.88
- Up to 87% better value when playing Sons Of The Forest than FX-8350 - €0.22 vs €1.71 per FPS
- Consumes up to 56% less energy than AMD FX-8350 - 55 vs 125 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-8350 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD FX-8350
- Performs up to 1% better in Sons Of The Forest than Celeron G1620 - 91 vs 90 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 8 vs 2 threads
Sons Of The Forest
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
FPS
90
98%
Value, €/FPS
€0.22/FPS
100%
Price, €
€20.16
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €20.16 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 147 minutes ago
Buy for €155.88 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 147 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron G1620 | vs | AMD FX-8350 |
---|---|---|
Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Oct 23rd, 2012 |
Celeron | Collection | FX |
Ivy Bridge | Codename | Vishera |
Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 8 |
2 | Threads | 8 |
2.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 4.0 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.2 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 125 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
27.0x | Multiplier | 20.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |