Key Differences
In short — Core i5-10600KF 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 Core i5-10600KF is 2705 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1620
- Up to 84% cheaper than Core i5-10600KF - €20.16 vs €124.55
- Up to 81% better value when playing FINAL FANTASY XIV: Endwalker than Core i5-10600KF - €0.09 vs €0.48 per FPS
- Consumes up to 56% less energy than Intel Core i5-10600KF - 55 vs 125 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i5-10600KF doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Core i5-10600KF
- Performs up to 16% better in FINAL FANTASY XIV: Endwalker than Celeron G1620 - 257 vs 222 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 12 vs 2 threads
FINAL FANTASY XIV: Endwalker
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Maximum
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
FPS
222
86%
Value, €/FPS
€0.09/FPS
100%
Price, €
€20.16
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €20.16 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 209 minutes ago
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
257
100%
Value, €/FPS
€0.48/FPS
18%
Price, €
€124.55
16%
FPS Winner
Buy for €124.55 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 209 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Maximum
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron G1620 | vs | Intel Core i5-10600KF |
---|---|---|
Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Apr 30th, 2020 |
Celeron | Collection | Core i5 |
Ivy Bridge | Codename | Comet Lake |
Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 6 |
2 | Threads | 12 |
2.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 4.1 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.8 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 125 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
27.0x | Multiplier | 41.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |