Buy on Amazon
€522.8
In Stock
Availability
Availability
No items available
Availability
Availability
Key Differences
In short — Core i9-7900X outperforms Celeron G1620 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i9-7900X is 1666 days newer than Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1620
- Consumes up to 61% less energy than Intel Core i9-7900X - 55 vs 140 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i9-7900X doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Core i9-7900X
- Performs up to 60% better in Counter-Strike 2 than Celeron G1620 - 366 vs 229 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 20 vs 2 threads
Counter-Strike 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
Intel BX80673I97900X Core Prozessor i9-7900X 3,3 GHz
Buy for €522.8 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 76385 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
Celeron G1620
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Core i9-7900X
Desktop • Jun 26th, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Celeron G1620
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
409
28.76230661040788%
Multi-Core
723
8.233686368295183%
Intel Celeron G1620 | vs | Intel Core i9-7900X |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Jun 26th, 2017 |
| Celeron | Collection | Core i9 |
| Ivy Bridge | Codename | Skylake-E/EP |
| Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | Intel Socket 2066 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| 2 | Cores | 10 |
| 2 | Threads | 20 |
| 2.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.3 GHz |
| Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.3 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 140 W |
| 22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
| 27.0x | Multiplier | 33.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | Yes |
Similar CPU Comparisons
Select from the most popular similar processor comparisons. Most compared processor combinations, including the currently selected ones, are at the top.
