Buy on Amazon
€264.87
In Stock
Availability
Availability
Availability
Availability
No items available
Key Differences
In short — Core i9-10900F outperforms Celeron G1610 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i9-10900F is 2705 days newer than Celeron G1610.
Advantages of Intel Core i9-10900F
- Performs up to 20% better in Need For Speed Unbound than Celeron G1610 - 147 vs 122 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 20 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610
- Consumes up to 15% less energy than Intel Core i9-10900F - 55 vs 65 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i9-10900F doesn't have integrated graphics
Need For Speed Unbound
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Intel Core i9-10900F (Basistakt: 2,80GHz; Sockel: LGA1200; 65Watt) Box, BX8070110900F
Buy for €264.87 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 75928 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Core i9-10900F
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Celeron G1610
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Celeron G1610
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
426
25.41766109785203%
Multi-Core
739
8.770472347495845%
Intel Core i9-10900F | vs | Intel Celeron G1610 |
|---|---|---|
Apr 30th, 2020 | Release Date | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
| Core i9 | Collection | Celeron |
| Comet Lake | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
| Intel Socket 1200 | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
10 | Cores | 2 |
20 | Threads | 2 |
2.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.6 GHz |
| 5.2 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
| 65 W | TDP | 55 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
28.0x | Multiplier | 26.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD |
| No | Overclockable | No |
Similar CPU Comparisons
Select from the most popular similar processor comparisons. Most compared processor combinations, including the currently selected ones, are at the top.
