Key Differences
In short — Core i5-12400 outperforms the cheaper Celeron G1610 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Celeron G1610 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i5-12400 is 3319 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G1610.
Advantages of Intel Core i5-12400
- Performs up to 22% better in Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Celeron G1610 - 204 vs 167 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 12 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610
- Up to 75% cheaper than Core i5-12400 - $27.05 vs $106.73
- Up to 69% better value when playing Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Core i5-12400 - $0.18 vs $0.58 per FPS
- Consumes up to 15% less energy than Intel Core i5-12400 - 55 vs 65 Watts
Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Buy for €118.47 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 23 minutes ago
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
FPS
167
82%
Value, €/FPS
€0.18/FPS
100%
Price, €
€30.03
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €30.03 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 22 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2022
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i5-12400 | vs | Intel Celeron G1610 |
---|---|---|
Jan 4th, 2022 | Release Date | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
Core i5 | Collection | Celeron |
Alder Lake | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
Intel Socket 1700 | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 2 |
12 | Threads | 2 |
2.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.6 GHz |
4.4 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
65 W | TDP | 55 W |
10 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
25.0x | Multiplier | 26.0x |
UHD Graphics 730 | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD |
No | Overclockable | No |