In The Last of Us Part II, the Core i3-10105T is slightly slower than the Celeron G1610. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i3-10105T
- Is 8 years and 3 months newer – Mar 16, 2021 vs Dec 03, 2012
- Is 8 years and 3 months newer
- Consumes up to 36% less energy – 35 vs 55 Watts
- Consumes up to 36% less energy
Celeron G1610
- Up to 17% faster in The Last of Us Part II – 207 vs 177 FPS
- Up to 17% faster in The Last of Us Part II
The Last of Us Part II FPS Calculator
Core i3-10105T vs Celeron G1610: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
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%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i3-10105T vs Celeron G1610 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i3-10105T vs Celeron G1610 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i3-10105T
Mar 16th, 2021
Cores
4-core
100%
L3 Cache
6 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.9 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2666 MHz
100%
Celeron G1610
Dec 3rd, 2012
Cores
2-core
50%
L3 Cache
2 MB
33%
Base Frequency
2.6 GHz
87%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i3-10105T Mar 16th, 2021 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Celeron G1610 Dec 3rd, 2012 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Mar 16th, 2021 | Released | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
| $134.00 | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1200 | Socket | LGA1155 |
35 W | Power Consumption | 55 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 2666 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | DDR3 |
| UHD Graphics 630 | Integrated GPU | Intel HD |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
