Key Differences
In short — FX-6200 outperforms Celeron G1610 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing FX-6200 is 280 days older than Celeron G1610.
Advantages of AMD FX-6200
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 6 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610
- Consumes up to 56% less energy than AMD FX-6200 - 55 vs 125 Watts
Starfield
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
FX-6200
Desktop • Feb 27th, 2012
Celeron G1610
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-6200 | vs | Intel Celeron G1610 |
|---|---|---|
| Feb 27th, 2012 | Release Date | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
| FX | Collection | Celeron |
| Zambezi | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
| AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
3 | Cores | 2 |
6 | Threads | 2 |
3.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.6 GHz |
| 4.1 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
| 125 W | TDP | 55 W |
| 32 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
| 19.0x | Multiplier | 26.0x |
| On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD |
Yes | Overclockable | No |
