Key Differences
In short — FX-6350 outperforms Celeron G1620 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 G1620.
Advantages of AMD FX-6350
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 6 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1620
- 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
Cities: Skylines II
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
FX-6350
Desktop • Apr 29th, 2013
Celeron G1620
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Celeron G1620
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
409
83.81147540983606%
Multi-Core
723
46.465295629820055%
AMD FX-6350 | vs | Intel Celeron G1620 |
|---|---|---|
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 | 2.7 GHz |
| 4.2 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
| 125 W | TDP | 55 W |
| 32 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
| 19.5x | Multiplier | 27.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD |
| No | Overclockable | No |
