Key Differences
In short — Core i3-12100F outperforms Celeron G1620 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i3-12100F is 3340 days newer than Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Celeron G1620
- Consumes up to 5% less energy than Intel Core i3-12100F - 55 vs 58 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i3-12100F doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Core i3-12100F
- Performs up to 30% better in Total War: WARHAMMER III than Celeron G1620 - 195 vs 150 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 8 vs 2 threads
Total War: WARHAMMER III
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jan 25th, 2022
FPS
195
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.39/FPS
100%
Price, $
$76.8
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for $76.8 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 163 minutes ago
My Games
With selected game settings
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Desktop • Jan 25th, 2022
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Celeron G1620 | vs | Core i3-12100F |
---|---|---|
Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Jan 25th, 2022 |
Celeron | Collection | Core i3 |
Ivy Bridge | Codename | Alder Lake |
Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | Intel Socket 1700 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 4 |
2 | Threads | 8 |
2.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.3 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.3 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 58 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 10 nm |
27.0x | Multiplier | 33.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | No |