Key Differences
In short — Core i7-13700KF 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 i7-13700KF is 3585 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G1610.
Advantages of Intel Core i7-13700KF
- Performs up to 32% better in Battlefield IV than Celeron G1610 - 488 vs 369 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 24 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610
- Up to 89% cheaper than Core i7-13700KF - $27.05 vs $241.3
- Up to 85% better value when playing Battlefield IV than Core i7-13700KF - $0.08 vs $0.55 per FPS
- Consumes up to 56% less energy than Intel Core i7-13700KF - 55 vs 125 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i7-13700KF doesn't have integrated graphics
Battlefield IV
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Sep 27th, 2022
FPS
488
100%
Value, €/FPS
€0.55/FPS
14%
Price, €
€267.84
11%
FPS Winner
Buy for €267.84 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 4162 minutes ago
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
FPS
369
75%
Value, €/FPS
€0.08/FPS
100%
Price, €
€30.03
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €30.03 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 4152 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Sep 27th, 2022
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i7-13700KF | vs | Intel Celeron G1610 |
---|---|---|
Sep 27th, 2022 | Release Date | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
Core i7 | Collection | Celeron |
Raptor Lake | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
Intel Socket 1700 | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
16 | Cores | 2 |
24 | Threads | 2 |
3.4 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.6 GHz |
5.4 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
125 W | TDP | 55 W |
10 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
34.0x | Multiplier | 26.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD |
Yes | Overclockable | No |