Key Differences
In short — Core i7-14700F 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 i7-14700F is 4053 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G1610.
Advantages of Celeron G1610
- Up to 86% cheaper than Core i7-14700F - $37.00 vs $273.18
- Up to 67% better value when playing Counter-Strike 2 than Core i7-14700F - $0.16 vs $0.49 per FPS
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i7-14700F doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Core i7-14700F
- Performs up to 141% better in Counter-Strike 2 than Celeron G1610 - 558 vs 232 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 28 vs 2 threads
Counter-Strike 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
Buy for $37 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 7342 minutes ago
Desktop • Jan 8th, 2024
FPS
558
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.49/FPS
33%
Price, $
$273.18
13%
FPS Winner
Buy for $273.18 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 7342 minutes ago
My Games
With selected game settings
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Desktop • Jan 8th, 2024
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Celeron G1610 | vs | Core i7-14700F |
---|---|---|
Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Jan 8th, 2024 |
Celeron | Collection | Core i7 |
Ivy Bridge | Codename | Raptor Lake |
Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | Intel Socket 1700 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 20 |
2 | Threads | 28 |
2.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.1 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.4 GHz |
55 W | TDP | Not Available |
22 nm | Process Size | 10 nm |
26.0x | Multiplier | 21.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | No |