Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 5 1400 outperforms Celeron G1620 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Ryzen 5 1400 is 1590 days newer than Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1620
- Consumes up to 15% less energy than AMD Ryzen 5 1400 - 55 vs 65 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen 5 1400 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 5 1400
- Performs up to 3% better in Assassin's Creed Valhalla than Celeron G1620 - 171 vs 166 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 8 vs 2 threads
Assassin's Creed Valhalla
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Celeron G1620
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Ryzen 5 1400
Desktop • Apr 11th, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron G1620 | vs | AMD Ryzen 5 1400 |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Apr 11th, 2017 |
| Celeron | Collection | Ryzen 5 |
| Ivy Bridge | Codename | Summit Ridge |
| Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | AMD Socket AM4 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| 2 | Cores | 4 |
| 2 | Threads | 8 |
| 2.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.2 GHz |
| Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.4 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 65 W |
| 22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
| 27.0x | Multiplier | 32.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | Yes |
