Buy on Amazon
£5.56
In Stock
AvailabilityMSRP in USD: $549
Availability
MSRP in USD: $549
No items available
Availability
Availability
Key Differences
In short — Ryzen Threadripper 1900X outperforms Celeron G1610 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Ryzen Threadripper 1900X is 1732 days newer than Celeron G1610.
Advantages of AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X
- Performs up to 5% better in World of Tanks than Celeron G1610 - 526 vs 503 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 16 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610
- Consumes up to 69% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X - 55 vs 180 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X doesn't have integrated graphics
World of Tanks
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
BQTEC Intel Celeron G1610 2.60 GHz Dual-Core Dual-Thread 2 MB Cache 55 W CPU Processor LGA 1155
Buy for £5.56 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 126 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Ryzen Threadripper 1900X
Desktop • Aug 31st, 2017
Celeron G1610
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Celeron G1610
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
426
36.47260273972603%
Multi-Core
739
12.754573696927856%
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X | vs | Intel Celeron G1610 |
|---|---|---|
Aug 31st, 2017 | Release Date | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
| Ryzen Threadripper | Collection | Celeron |
| Whitehaven | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
| AMD Socket SP3r2 | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 2 |
16 | Threads | 2 |
3.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.6 GHz |
| 4.0 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
| 180 W | TDP | 55 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
38.0x | Multiplier | 26.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD |
Yes | Overclockable | No |
Similar CPU Comparisons
Select from the most popular similar processor comparisons. Most compared processor combinations, including the currently selected ones, are at the top.
