Key Differences
In short — Ryzen Threadripper 3990X outperforms Celeron G1610 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Ryzen Threadripper 3990X is 2622 days newer than Celeron G1610.
Advantages of AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X
- Performs up to 15% better in Battlefield 2042 than Celeron G1610 - 165 vs 143 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 128 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610
- Consumes up to 80% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X - 55 vs 280 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X doesn't have integrated graphics
Battlefield 2042
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
FPS
143
86.66666666666667%
Value, €/FPS
€0.51/FPS
100%
Price, €
€72.66
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €72.66 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 2399 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Feb 7th, 2020
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
426
27.342747111681643%
Multi-Core
739
5.315017261219793%
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X | vs | Intel Celeron G1610 |
---|---|---|
Feb 7th, 2020 | Release Date | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
Ryzen Threadripper | Collection | Celeron |
Castle Peak | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
AMD Socket TRX4 | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
64 | Cores | 2 |
128 | Threads | 2 |
2.9 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.6 GHz |
4.3 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
280 W | TDP | 55 W |
7 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
29.0x | Multiplier | 26.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD |
Yes | Overclockable | No |