Key Differences
In short — Celeron G3930T outperforms Celeron G1620 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Celeron G3930T is 1492 days newer than Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G3930T
- Performs up to 5% better in Starfield than Celeron G1620 - 45 vs 43 FPS
- Consumes up to 36% less energy than Intel Celeron G1620 - 35 vs 55 Watts
Starfield
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Celeron G3930T
Desktop • Jan 3rd, 2017
Celeron G1620
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Celeron G1620
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
409
74.63503649635037%
Multi-Core
723
76.26582278481013%
Intel Celeron G3930T | vs | Intel Celeron G1620 |
|---|---|---|
Jan 3rd, 2017 | Release Date | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
| Celeron | Collection | Celeron |
| Kaby Lake | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
| Intel Socket 1151 | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| 2 | Cores | 2 |
| 2 | Threads | 2 |
| 2.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.7 GHz |
| Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
35 W | TDP | 55 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
| 27.0x | Multiplier | 27.0x |
| Intel HD 610 | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD |
| No | Overclockable | No |
