In The Last of Us Part II, the Celeron G1610 is faster than the Core Ultra 9 285 and it's also a much better value for money, as it's $514 cheaper!
Celeron G1610
- Up to 22% faster in The Last of Us Part II – 207 vs 170 FPS
- Up to 22% faster in The Last of Us Part II
- Up to 91% cheaper – $49.00 vs $563.41
- Up to 91% cheaper
- Up to 93% better value in The Last of Us Part II – $0.23 vs $3.31/FPS
- Up to 93% better value in The Last of Us Part II
- Consumes up to 15% less energy – 55 vs 65 Watts
- Consumes up to 15% less energy
Core Ultra 9 285
- Is 12 years and 1 month newer – Jan 14, 2025 vs Dec 03, 2012
- Is 12 years and 1 month newer
The Last of Us Part II FPS Calculator
Celeron G1610 vs Core Ultra 9 285: Comparison of performance and price
Celeron G1610
Dec 3rd, 2012
Average FPS
207 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
155 FPS
100%
Price, $
$49
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.23/FPS
100%
Core Ultra 9 285
Jan 14th, 2025
Average FPS
170 FPS
82%
Min 1% FPS
127 FPS
82%
Price, $
$563.41
8%
Value, $/FPS
$3.31/FPS
7%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Celeron G1610 vs Core Ultra 9 285 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Celeron G1610 vs Core Ultra 9 285 in core CPU performance specifications
Celeron G1610
Dec 3rd, 2012
Cores
2-core
8%
L3 Cache
2 MB
6%
Base Frequency
2.6 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Core Ultra 9 285
Jan 14th, 2025
Cores
24-core
100%
L3 Cache
36 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.5 GHz
96%
Turbo Frequency
5.6 GHz
100%
Max. DDR5 RAM Speed
6400 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Celeron G1610 Dec 3rd, 2012 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core Ultra 9 285 Jan 14th, 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Dec 3rd, 2012 | Released | Jan 14th, 2025 |
| – | MSRP | $579.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1155 | Socket | LGA1851 |
55 W | Power Consumption | 65 W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 6400 MHz (DDR5) |
| Intel HD | Integrated GPU | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
