Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 5 7500F outperforms the cheaper Celeron G1620 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Celeron G1620 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Ryzen 5 7500F is 3883 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1620
- Up to 78% cheaper than Ryzen 5 7500F - $35.83 vs $163.77
- Up to 70% better value when playing Dying Light 2: Stay Human than Ryzen 5 7500F - $0.35 vs $1.15 per FPS
- Consumes up to 15% less energy than AMD Ryzen 5 7500F - 55 vs 65 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen 5 7500F doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 5 7500F
- Performs up to 39% better in Dying Light 2: Stay Human than Celeron G1620 - 158 vs 114 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 12 vs 2 threads
Dying Light 2: Stay Human
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
FPS
114
72.15189873417721%
Value, €/FPS
€0.35/FPS
100%
Price, €
€39.77
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €39.77 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 2011 minutes ago
Desktop • Jul 22nd, 2023
FPS
158
100%
Value, €/FPS
€1.15/FPS
30.434782608695656%
Price, €
€181.79
21%
FPS Winner
Buy for €181.79 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 2022 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Desktop • Jul 22nd, 2023
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron G1620 | vs | AMD Ryzen 5 7500F |
---|---|---|
Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Jul 22nd, 2023 |
Celeron | Collection | Ryzen 5 |
Ivy Bridge | Codename | Not Available |
Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | AMD Socket AM5 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 6 |
2 | Threads | 12 |
2.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.7 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.0 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 65 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 5 nm |
27.0x | Multiplier | 37.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |