Key Differences
In short — Core i9-11900KF outperforms the cheaper Celeron G1610 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i9-11900KF is 3025 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G1610.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610
- Up to 98% cheaper than Core i9-11900KF - £5.56 vs £368.66
- Consumes up to 56% less energy than Intel Core i9-11900KF - 55 vs 125 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i9-11900KF doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Core i9-11900KF
- Performs up to 16% better in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II than Celeron G1610 - 220 vs 190 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 16 vs 2 threads
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Buy for £5.56 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 208 minutes ago
Buy for £368.66 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 208 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
426
18.385843763487266%
Multi-Core
739
7.298765432098765%
Intel Celeron G1610 | vs | Intel Core i9-11900KF |
---|---|---|
Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Mar 16th, 2021 |
Celeron | Collection | Core i9 |
Ivy Bridge | Codename | Rocket Lake |
Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 8 |
2 | Threads | 16 |
2.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.3 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 125 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
26.0x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |