Key Differences
In short — FX-9370 outperforms Celeron G1620 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing FX-9370 is 190 days newer than Celeron G1620.
Advantages of AMD FX-9370
- Performs up to 0% better in Tom Clancy’s The Division 2 than Celeron G1620 - 223 vs 222 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 8 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1620
- Consumes up to 75% less energy than AMD FX-9370 - 55 vs 220 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-9370 doesn't have integrated graphics
Tom Clancy’s The Division 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
FX-9370
Desktop • Jun 11th, 2013
Celeron G1620
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-9370 | vs | Intel Celeron G1620 |
|---|---|---|
Jun 11th, 2013 | Release Date | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
| FX | Collection | Celeron |
| Vishera | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
| AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 2 |
8 | Threads | 2 |
4.4 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.7 GHz |
| 4.7 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
| 220 W | TDP | 55 W |
| 32 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
| 22.0x | Multiplier | 27.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD |
Yes | Overclockable | No |
