Buy on Amazon
$37
In Stock
AvailabilityMSRP in USD: $2399
Availability
MSRP in USD: $2399
No items available
Availability
Availability
Key Differences
In short — Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX outperforms Celeron G1610 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX is 3382 days newer than Celeron G1610.
Advantages of AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX
- Performs up to 27% better in Lost Ark than Celeron G1610 - 281 vs 222 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 48 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610
- Consumes up to 80% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX - 55 vs 280 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX doesn't have integrated graphics
Lost Ark
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX
Server/Workstation • Mar 8th, 2022
FPS
281
100%
Value, $/FPS
Price, $
FPS Winner
Intel Celeron G1610 2.60GHz LGA 1155 Processor BX80637G1610
Buy for $37 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 6197 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX
Server/Workstation • Mar 8th, 2022
Celeron G1610
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX
Server/Workstation • Mar 8th, 2022
Single-Core
2065
100%
Multi-Core
14738
100%
AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX | vs | Intel Celeron G1610 |
|---|---|---|
Mar 8th, 2022 | Release Date | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
| Ryzen Threadripper | Collection | Celeron |
| Chagall | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
| AMD Socket WRX8 | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
24 | Cores | 2 |
48 | Threads | 2 |
3.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.6 GHz |
| 4.5 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
| 280 W | TDP | 55 W |
7 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
38.0x | 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.
