Key Differences
In short — Core i5-13400F 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 i5-13400F is 3684 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G1610.
Advantages of Intel Core i5-13400F
- Performs up to 16% better in PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds than Celeron G1610 - 316 vs 273 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 16 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610
- Up to 58% cheaper than Core i5-13400F - €88.88 vs €211.0
- Up to 51% better value when playing PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds than Core i5-13400F - €0.33 vs €0.67 per FPS
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i5-13400F doesn't have integrated graphics
PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Buy for €211 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 219 minutes ago
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
FPS
273
86%
Value, €/FPS
€0.33/FPS
100%
Price, €
€88.88
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €88.88 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 219 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2023
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i5-13400F | vs | Intel Celeron G1610 |
---|---|---|
Jan 4th, 2023 | Release Date | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
Core i5 | Collection | Celeron |
Raptor Lake | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
Intel Socket 1700 | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
10 | Cores | 2 |
16 | Threads | 2 |
2.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.6 GHz |
4.6 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
Not Available | TDP | 55 W |
10 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
25.0x | Multiplier | 26.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD |
No | Overclockable | No |