Buy on Amazon
€22.88
In Stock
Availability
Availability
Availability
Availability
Key Differences
In short, we have a clear winner — FX-4100 outperforms the more expensive Celeron G1610 on the selected game parameters, and is also a better bang for your buck! The better performing FX-4100 is 418 days older than the more expensive Celeron G1610.
Advantages of AMD FX-4100
- Up to 74% cheaper than Celeron G1610 - €22.88 vs €88.88
- Up to 74% better value when playing Baldur's Gate 3 than Celeron G1610 - €0.21 vs €0.82 per FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 4 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610
- Consumes up to 42% less energy than AMD FX-4100 - 55 vs 95 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-4100 doesn't have integrated graphics
Baldur's Gate 3
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Hegem AMD FX-Series FX4100 FX-4100 FX 4100 Processore CPU Quad-Core Quad-Thread da 3,6 GHz FD4100WMW4KGU Presa AM3+ Senza Ventola
Buy for €22.88 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 129 minutes ago
Intel Celeron G1610
Buy for €88.88 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 129 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
FX-4100
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
Celeron G1610
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-4100 | vs | Intel Celeron G1610 |
|---|---|---|
| Oct 12th, 2011 | Release Date | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
| FX | Collection | Celeron |
| Zambezi | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
| AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 2 |
4 | Threads | 2 |
3.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.6 GHz |
| 3.7 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
| 95 W | TDP | 55 W |
| 32 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
| 18.0x | Multiplier | 26.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD |
Yes | 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.
