Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 3 3200G outperforms Celeron G1620 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Ryzen 3 3200G is 2407 days newer than Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1620
- Consumes up to 15% less energy than AMD Ryzen 3 3200G - 55 vs 65 Watts
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 3 3200G
- Performs up to 74% better in Diablo IV than Celeron G1620 - 155 vs 89 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 4 vs 2 threads
Diablo IV
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Celeron G1620
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Ryzen 3 3200G
Desktop • Jul 7th, 2019
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron G1620 | vs | AMD Ryzen 3 3200G |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Jul 7th, 2019 |
| Celeron | Collection | Ryzen 3 |
| Ivy Bridge | Codename | Picasso |
| Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | AMD Socket AM4 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| 2 | Cores | 4 |
| 2 | Threads | 4 |
| 2.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.6 GHz |
| Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.0 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 65 W |
| 22 nm | Process Size | 12 nm |
| 27.0x | Multiplier | 36.0x |
| Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | Radeon Vega 8 |
| No | Overclockable | Yes |
