Key Differences
In short — Core i7-7820X outperforms Celeron G1620 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i7-7820X is 1666 days newer than Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1620
- Consumes up to 61% less energy than Intel Core i7-7820X - 55 vs 140 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i7-7820X doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Core i7-7820X
- Performs up to 136% better in Immortals of Aveum than Celeron G1620 - 52 vs 22 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 16 vs 2 threads
Immortals of Aveum
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Celeron G1620
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Core i7-7820X
Desktop • Jun 26th, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Celeron G1620
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
409
28.98653437278526%
Multi-Core
723
9.211364505032488%
Intel Celeron G1620 | vs | Intel Core i7-7820X |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Jun 26th, 2017 |
| Celeron | Collection | Core i7 |
| Ivy Bridge | Codename | Skylake-E/EP |
| Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | Intel Socket 2066 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| 2 | Cores | 8 |
| 2 | Threads | 16 |
| 2.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.6 GHz |
| Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.3 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 140 W |
| 22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
| 27.0x | Multiplier | 36.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | Yes |
