Buy on Amazon
€128.88
In Stock
AvailabilityMSRP in USD: $122
Availability
MSRP in USD: $122
Availability
Availability
Key Differences
In short — Core i3-9100F 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 i3-9100F is 2332 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G1610.
Advantages of Intel Core i3-9100F
- Performs up to 12% better in Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Celeron G1610 - 187 vs 167 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 4 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610
- Up to 31% cheaper than Core i3-9100F - €88.88 vs €128.88
- Up to 23% better value when playing Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Core i3-9100F - €0.53 vs €0.69 per FPS
- Consumes up to 15% less energy than Intel Core i3-9100F - 55 vs 65 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i3-9100F doesn't have integrated graphics
Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Core i3-9100F
Desktop • Apr 23rd, 2019
FPS
187
100%
Value, €/FPS
€0.69/FPS
76%
Price, €
€128.88
68%
FPS Winner
Intel Core i3-9100F Processore 4x3.6 (Boost 4.2) GHz 6MB-L3 Cache Socket 1151
Buy for €128.88 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 18396 minutes ago
Celeron G1610
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
FPS
167
89%
Value, €/FPS
€0.53/FPS
100%
Price, €
€88.88
100%
Value Winner
Intel Celeron G1610
Buy for €88.88 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 18395 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Core i3-9100F
Desktop • Apr 23rd, 2019
Celeron G1610
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i3-9100F | vs | Intel Celeron G1610 |
|---|---|---|
Apr 23rd, 2019 | Release Date | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
| Core i3 | Collection | Celeron |
| Coffee Lake | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
| Intel Socket 1151 | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 2 |
4 | Threads | 2 |
3.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.6 GHz |
| 4.2 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
| 65 W | TDP | 55 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
36.0x | Multiplier | 26.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD |
| No | Overclockable | No |
Similar CPU Comparisons
Select from the most popular similar processor comparisons. Most compared processor combinations, including the currently selected ones, are at the top.
