Key Differences
In short — Core i5-9400F outperforms Celeron G1620 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i5-9400F is 2227 days newer than Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1620
- Consumes up to 15% less energy than Intel Core i5-9400F - 55 vs 65 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i5-9400F doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Core i5-9400F
- Performs up to 16% better in Sea of Thieves than Celeron G1620 - 235 vs 203 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 6 vs 2 threads
Sea of Thieves
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Mythical
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Mythical
Celeron G1620
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Core i5-9400F
Desktop • Jan 8th, 2019
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Celeron G1620
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
409
29.680696661828737%
Multi-Core
723
14.95655771617708%
Intel Celeron G1620 | vs | Intel Core i5-9400F |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Jan 8th, 2019 |
| Celeron | Collection | Core i5 |
| Ivy Bridge | Codename | Coffee Lake |
| Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| 2 | Cores | 6 |
| 2 | Threads | 6 |
| 2.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.9 GHz |
| Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.1 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 65 W |
| 22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
| 27.0x | Multiplier | 29.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | No |
