Key Differences
In short — Core i5-11600K 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 i5-11600K is 3025 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G1610.
Advantages of Intel Core i5-11600K
- Performs up to 22% better in FINAL FANTASY XIV: Endwalker than Celeron G1610 - 273 vs 223 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 12 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610
- Up to 57% cheaper than Core i5-11600K - €88.88 vs €208.88
- Up to 48% better value when playing FINAL FANTASY XIV: Endwalker than Core i5-11600K - €0.4 vs €0.77 per FPS
- Consumes up to 56% less energy than Intel Core i5-11600K - 55 vs 125 Watts
FINAL FANTASY XIV: Endwalker
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Maximum
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
FPS
273
100%
Value, €/FPS
€0.77/FPS
51%
Price, €
€208.88
42%
FPS Winner
Buy for €208.88 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 11088 minutes ago
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
FPS
223
81%
Value, €/FPS
€0.4/FPS
100%
Price, €
€88.88
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €88.88 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 11087 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Maximum
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i5-11600K | vs | Intel Celeron G1610 |
---|---|---|
Mar 16th, 2021 | Release Date | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
Core i5 | Collection | Celeron |
Rocket Lake | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
Intel Socket 1200 | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 2 |
12 | Threads | 2 |
3.9 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.6 GHz |
4.9 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
125 W | TDP | 55 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
39.0x | Multiplier | 26.0x |
UHD Graphics 750 | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD |
Yes | Overclockable | No |