Buy on Amazon
€88.99
In Stock
Availability
Availability
No items available
Availability
Availability
Key Differences
In short — FX-6350 outperforms Celeron G1610 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing FX-6350 is 147 days newer than Celeron G1610.
Advantages of AMD FX-6350
- Performs up to 1% better in Dead Space than Celeron G1610 - 145 vs 144 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 6 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610
- Consumes up to 56% less energy than AMD FX-6350 - 55 vs 125 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-6350 doesn't have integrated graphics
Dead Space
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Celeron G1610
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
FPS
144
99%
Value, €/FPS
€0.62/FPS
100%
Price, €
€88.99
100%
Value Winner
Intel Celeron G1610
Buy for €88.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 84 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
FX-6350
Desktop • Apr 29th, 2013
Celeron G1610
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-6350 | vs | Intel Celeron G1610 |
|---|---|---|
Apr 29th, 2013 | Release Date | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
| FX | Collection | Celeron |
| Vishera | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
| AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 2 |
6 | Threads | 2 |
3.9 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.6 GHz |
| 4.2 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
| 125 W | TDP | 55 W |
| 32 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
| 19.5x | 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.
