Key Differences
In short — Core i7-11700F outperforms the cheaper Celeron G1610 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Celeron G1610 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i7-11700F is 3025 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G1610.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610
- Up to 70% cheaper than Core i7-11700F - €88.88 vs €294.62
- Up to 63% better value when playing Assassin's Creed Odyssey than Core i7-11700F - €0.77 vs €2.06 per FPS
- Consumes up to 15% less energy than Intel Core i7-11700F - 55 vs 65 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i7-11700F doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Core i7-11700F
- Performs up to 23% better in Assassin's Creed Odyssey than Celeron G1610 - 143 vs 116 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 16 vs 2 threads
Assassin's Creed Odyssey
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
FPS
116
81%
Value, €/FPS
€0.77/FPS
100%
Price, €
€88.88
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €88.88 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 182 minutes ago
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
FPS
143
100%
Value, €/FPS
€2.06/FPS
37%
Price, €
€294.62
30%
FPS Winner
Buy for €294.62 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 26 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron G1610 | vs | Intel Core i7-11700F |
---|---|---|
Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Mar 16th, 2021 |
Celeron | Collection | Core i7 |
Ivy Bridge | Codename | Rocket Lake |
Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 8 |
2 | Threads | 16 |
2.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.5 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.9 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 65 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
26.0x | Multiplier | 25.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | No |