In The Last of Us Part II, the Celeron G1610 is faster than the Ryzen 9 9900X3D and it's also a much better value for money, as it's $520 cheaper!
Celeron G1610
- Up to 19% faster in The Last of Us Part II – 208 vs 175 FPS
- Up to 19% faster in The Last of Us Part II
- Up to 91% cheaper – $49.00 vs $569.00
- Up to 91% cheaper
- Up to 93% better value in The Last of Us Part II – $0.23 vs $3.25/FPS
- Up to 93% better value in The Last of Us Part II
- Consumes up to 54% less energy – 55 vs 120 Watts
- Consumes up to 54% less energy
Ryzen 9 9900X3D
- Is 12 years and 1 month newer – Jan 06, 2025 vs Dec 03, 2012
- Is 12 years and 1 month newer
The Last of Us Part II FPS Calculator
Celeron G1610 vs Ryzen 9 9900X3D: Comparison of performance and price
Celeron G1610
Dec 3rd, 2012
Average FPS
208 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
156 FPS
100%
Price, $
$49
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.23/FPS
100%
Ryzen 9 9900X3D
Jan 6th, 2025
Average FPS
175 FPS
84%
Min 1% FPS
131 FPS
84%
Price, $
$569
8%
Value, $/FPS
$3.25/FPS
7%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Celeron G1610 vs Ryzen 9 9900X3D in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Celeron G1610 vs Ryzen 9 9900X3D in core CPU performance specifications
Celeron G1610
Dec 3rd, 2012
Cores
2-core
17%
L3 Cache
2 MB
2%
Base Frequency
2.6 GHz
59%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Ryzen 9 9900X3D
Jan 6th, 2025
Cores
12-core
100%
L3 Cache
128 MB
100%
Base Frequency
4.4 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
5.5 GHz
100%
Max. DDR5 RAM Speed
5600 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Celeron G1610 Dec 3rd, 2012 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Ryzen 9 9900X3D Jan 6th, 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Dec 3rd, 2012 | Released | Jan 6th, 2025 |
| – | MSRP | $599.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1155 | Socket | AM5 |
55 W | Power Consumption | 120 W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 5600 MHz (DDR5) |
| Intel HD | Integrated GPU | Radeon Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
