Key Differences
In short — Core i3-14100F 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 i3-14100F is 4053 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G1610.
Advantages of Intel Core i3-14100F
- Performs up to 18% better in God of War than Celeron G1610 - 191 vs 162 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 8 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610
- Up to 59% cheaper than Core i3-14100F - €72.66 vs €177.61
- Up to 52% better value when playing God of War than Core i3-14100F - €0.45 vs €0.93 per FPS
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i3-14100F doesn't have integrated graphics
God of War
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jan 8th, 2024
FPS
191
100%
Value, €/FPS
€0.93/FPS
48%
Price, €
€177.61
40%
FPS Winner
Buy for €177.61 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 3460 minutes ago
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
FPS
162
84%
Value, €/FPS
€0.45/FPS
100%
Price, €
€72.66
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €72.66 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 3461 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jan 8th, 2024
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i3-14100F | vs | Intel Celeron G1610 |
---|---|---|
Jan 8th, 2024 | Release Date | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
Core i3 | Collection | Celeron |
Raptor Lake | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
Intel Socket 1700 | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 2 |
8 | Threads | 2 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.6 GHz |
4.7 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
Not Available | TDP | 55 W |
10 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
35.0x | Multiplier | 26.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD |
No | Overclockable | No |