Buy on Amazon
€88.88
In Stock
Availability
Availability
No items available
Availability
Availability
Key Differences
In short — EPYC 7302P outperforms Celeron G1610 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing EPYC 7302P is 2438 days newer than Celeron G1610.
Advantages of AMD EPYC 7302P
- Performs up to 9% better in Hogwarts Legacy than Celeron G1610 - 84 vs 77 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 32 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610
- Consumes up to 65% less energy than AMD EPYC 7302P - 55 vs 155 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD EPYC 7302P doesn't have integrated graphics
Hogwarts Legacy
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Celeron G1610
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
FPS
77
91%
Value, €/FPS
€1.15/FPS
100%
Price, €
€88.88
100%
Value Winner
Intel Celeron G1610
Buy for €88.88 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 68 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
EPYC 7302P
Server/Workstation • Aug 7th, 2019
Celeron G1610
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD EPYC 7302P | vs | Intel Celeron G1610 |
|---|---|---|
Aug 7th, 2019 | Release Date | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
| EPYC | Collection | Celeron |
| Rome | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
| AMD Socket SP3 | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
16 | Cores | 2 |
32 | Threads | 2 |
3.0 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.6 GHz |
| 3.3 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
| 155 W | TDP | 55 W |
7 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
30.0x | Multiplier | 26.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD |
| No | Overclockable | No |
Similar CPU Comparisons
Select from the most popular similar processor comparisons. Most compared processor combinations, including the currently selected ones, are at the top.
