The Celeron G1610 is a slightly slower gaming CPU than the FX-8300. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Advantages of the Celeron G1610
- Consumes up to 42% less energy – 55 vs 95 Watts
Advantages of the FX-8300
- A slightly faster CPU for gaming
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously – 8 vs 2 threads
Celeron G1610 vs FX-8300 for Gaming
The CPU's performance in selected game and settings
Celeron G1610
Dec 3rd, 2012
Average FPS
648
100%
Min 1% FPS
365
100%
Price, €
Out of Stock
Value, €/FPS
Not Available
All items are out of stock.
Celeron G1610 vs FX-8300 in My Games
The FPS you'll get in saved games, click on a game to change it
The FPS you'll get in saved games, click on a game to change it
Add a Game
Select Settings
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Celeron G1610 vs FX-8300 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Celeron G1610 vs FX-8300 in core CPU performance specifications
Celeron G1610
Dec 3rd, 2012
Cores
2-core
25%
L3 Cache
2 MB
25%
Base Frequency
2.6 GHz
79%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
FX-8300
Oct 23rd, 2012
Cores
8-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.3 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4.2 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1866 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of all specifications
Celeron G1610 | SpecificationsComparison of all specifications | FX-8300 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Oct 23rd, 2012 |
| Not Available | MSRP | Not Available |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
| Ivy Bridge | Codename | Vishera |
55 W | Power Consumption | 95 W |
| Performance | ||
| 2 | Cores | 8 |
| 2 | Threads | 8 |
| 2.6 GHz | Base Frequency | 3.3 GHz |
| Non-Turbo | Turbo Frequency | 4.2 GHz |
| 2 MB | L3 Cache | 8 MB |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | DDR3 @ 1866 MHz |
| Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
| No | Overclockable | Yes |
