Key Differences
In short — Core i5-6400 outperforms Celeron G1620 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i5-6400 is 941 days newer than Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Intel Core i5-6400
- Performs up to 9% better in Remnant II than Celeron G1620 - 85 vs 78 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 4 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1620
- Consumes up to 15% less energy than Intel Core i5-6400 - 55 vs 65 Watts
Remnant II
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Core i5-6400
Desktop • Jul 2nd, 2015
Celeron G1620
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Celeron G1620
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
409
36.81368136813681%
Multi-Core
723
23.916639100231556%
Intel Core i5-6400 | vs | Intel Celeron G1620 |
|---|---|---|
Jul 2nd, 2015 | Release Date | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
| Core i5 | Collection | Celeron |
| Skylake | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
| Intel Socket 1151 | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 2 |
4 | Threads | 2 |
| 2.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.7 GHz |
| 3.3 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
| 65 W | TDP | 55 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
| 27.0x | Multiplier | 27.0x |
| HD Graphics 530 | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD |
| No | Overclockable | No |
