Key Differences
In short — Core i3-10320 outperforms Celeron G1610 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i3-10320 is 2705 days newer than Celeron G1610.
Advantages of Intel Core i3-10320
- Performs up to 11% better in Overwatch 2 than Celeron G1610 - 353 vs 317 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 8 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610
- Consumes up to 15% less energy than Intel Core i3-10320 - 55 vs 65 Watts
Overwatch 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Core i3-10320
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Celeron G1610
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i3-10320 | vs | Intel Celeron G1610 |
|---|---|---|
Apr 30th, 2020 | Release Date | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
| Core i3 | Collection | Celeron |
| Comet Lake | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
| Intel Socket 1200 | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 2 |
8 | Threads | 2 |
3.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.6 GHz |
| 4.6 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
| 65 W | TDP | 55 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
38.0x | Multiplier | 26.0x |
| UHD Graphics 630 | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD |
| No | Overclockable | No |
