Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 5 3600X 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 3600X is 2407 days newer than Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1620
- Consumes up to 42% less energy than AMD Ryzen 5 3600X - 55 vs 95 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen 5 3600X doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 5 3600X
- Performs up to 3% better in Crysis 3 Remastered than Celeron G1620 - 184 vs 178 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 12 vs 2 threads
Crysis 3 Remastered
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
Celeron G1620
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Ryzen 5 3600X
Desktop • Jul 7th, 2019
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron G1620 | vs | AMD Ryzen 5 3600X |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Jul 7th, 2019 |
| Celeron | Collection | Ryzen 5 |
| Ivy Bridge | Codename | Matisse |
| Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | AMD Socket AM4 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| 2 | Cores | 6 |
| 2 | Threads | 12 |
| 2.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.8 GHz |
| Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.4 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 95 W |
| 22 nm | Process Size | 7 nm |
| 27.0x | Multiplier | 38.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | Yes |
