Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 7 1700 outperforms Celeron G1620 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Ryzen 7 1700 is 1550 days newer than Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1620
- Consumes up to 15% less energy than AMD Ryzen 7 1700 - 55 vs 65 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen 7 1700 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 7 1700
- Performs up to 16% better in Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Siege than Celeron G1620 - 509 vs 439 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 16 vs 2 threads
Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Siege
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Celeron G1620
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Ryzen 7 1700
Desktop • Mar 2nd, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Celeron G1620
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
409
40.69651741293532%
Multi-Core
723
14.176470588235293%
Intel Celeron G1620 | vs | AMD Ryzen 7 1700 |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Mar 2nd, 2017 |
| Celeron | Collection | Ryzen 7 |
| Ivy Bridge | Codename | Summit Ridge |
| Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | AMD Socket AM4 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| 2 | Cores | 8 |
| 2 | Threads | 16 |
| 2.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.0 GHz |
| Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.7 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 65 W |
| 22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
| 27.0x | Multiplier | 30.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | Yes |
