In Deathloop, the Atom x7405C is slightly slower than the Celeron G1610. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Atom x7405C
- Is 11 years and 4 months newer – Apr 08, 2024 vs Dec 03, 2012
- Is 11 years and 4 months newer
- Consumes up to 78% less energy – 12 vs 55 Watts
- Consumes up to 78% less energy
Celeron G1610
- Up to 3% faster in Deathloop – 225 vs 218 FPS
- Up to 3% faster in Deathloop
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
Deathloop FPS Calculator
Atom x7405C vs Celeron G1610: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
Celeron G1610
Dec 3rd, 2012
Average FPS
225 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
168 FPS
100%
Price, $
$49
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.21/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Atom x7405C vs Celeron G1610 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Atom x7405C vs Celeron G1610 in core CPU performance specifications
Atom x7405C
Apr 8th, 2024
Cores
4-core
100%
L3 Cache
6 MB
100%
Base Frequency
1.7 GHz
65%
Turbo Frequency
3.4 GHz
100%
Max. DDR5 RAM Speed
4800 MHz
100%
Celeron G1610
Dec 3rd, 2012
Cores
2-core
50%
L3 Cache
2 MB
33%
Base Frequency
2.6 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Atom x7405C Apr 8th, 2024 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Celeron G1610 Dec 3rd, 2012 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Apr 8th, 2024 | Released | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
| $57.00 | MSRP | – |
Laptop | Segment | Desktop |
| Intel BGA 1264 | Socket | LGA1155 |
12 W | Power Consumption | 55 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 3200 MHz (DDR4), 4800 MHz (DDR5) | RAM | DDR3 |
| No Integrated Graphics | Integrated GPU | Intel HD |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
