Key Differences
In short — Ryzen Threadripper 2920X outperforms Celeron G1610T on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Ryzen Threadripper 2920X is 2130 days newer than Celeron G1610T.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610T
- Consumes up to 81% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X - 35 vs 180 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X
- Performs up to 13% better in Valorant than Celeron G1610T - 761 vs 674 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610T - 24 vs 2 threads
Valorant
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Desktop • Oct 3rd, 2018
FPS
761
100%
Value, £/FPS
£0.83/FPS
100%
Price, £
£629.22
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for £629.22 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 74 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Desktop • Oct 3rd, 2018
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron G1610T | vs | AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X |
---|---|---|
Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Oct 3rd, 2018 |
Celeron | Collection | Ryzen Threadripper |
Ivy Bridge | Codename | Colfax |
Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | AMD Socket SP3r2 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 12 |
2 | Threads | 24 |
2.3 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.3 GHz |
35 W | TDP | 180 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 12 nm |
23.0x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |