Key Differences
In short — Core i5-6400 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 i5-6400 is 941 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1620
- Up to 78% cheaper than Core i5-6400 - €20.16 vs €93.06
- Up to 77% better value when playing Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order than Core i5-6400 - €0.1 vs €0.43 per FPS
- Consumes up to 15% less energy than Intel Core i5-6400 - 55 vs 65 Watts
Advantages of Intel Core i5-6400
- Performs up to 1% better in Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order than Celeron G1620 - 214 vs 211 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 4 vs 2 threads
Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
FPS
211
98%
Value, €/FPS
€0.1/FPS
100%
Price, €
€20.16
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €20.16 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 228 minutes ago
Buy for €93.06 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 11 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Desktop • Jul 2nd, 2015
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron G1620 | vs | Intel Core i5-6400 |
---|---|---|
Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Jul 2nd, 2015 |
Celeron | Collection | Core i5 |
Ivy Bridge | Codename | Skylake |
Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 4 |
2 | Threads | 4 |
2.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.7 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.3 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 65 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
27.0x | Multiplier | 27.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | HD Graphics 530 |
No | Overclockable | No |