Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 3 3100 outperforms Celeron G1610 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Ryzen 3 3100 is 2699 days newer than Celeron G1610.
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 3 3100
- Performs up to 13% better in Battlefield IV than Celeron G1610 - 418 vs 369 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 8 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610
- Consumes up to 15% less energy than AMD Ryzen 3 3100 - 55 vs 65 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen 3 3100 doesn't have integrated graphics
Battlefield IV
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Ryzen 3 3100
Desktop • Apr 24th, 2020
Celeron G1610
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD Ryzen 3 3100 | vs | Intel Celeron G1610 |
|---|---|---|
Apr 24th, 2020 | Release Date | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
| Ryzen 3 | Collection | Celeron |
| Matisse | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
| AMD Socket AM4 | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 2 |
8 | Threads | 2 |
3.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.6 GHz |
| 3.9 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
| 65 W | TDP | 55 W |
7 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
36.0x | Multiplier | 26.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD |
Yes | Overclockable | No |
