Key Differences
In short — Core i9-10900KF outperforms Celeron G1620 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i9-10900KF is 2705 days newer than Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Intel Core i9-10900KF
- Performs up to 49% better in Starfield than Celeron G1620 - 64 vs 43 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 20 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1620
- Consumes up to 56% less energy than Intel Core i9-10900KF - 55 vs 125 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i9-10900KF doesn't have integrated graphics
Starfield
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
64
100%
Value, €/FPS
€5/FPS
100%
Price, €
€319.96
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for €319.96 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 2605 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
409
23.19909245604084%
Multi-Core
723
7.898186585099411%
Intel Core i9-10900KF | vs | Intel Celeron G1620 |
---|---|---|
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 |
3.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.7 GHz |
5.3 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
125 W | TDP | 55 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
37.0x | Multiplier | 27.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD |
Yes | Overclockable | No |