In Deathloop, the Core i5-680 is slightly slower than the Celeron G1610. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i5-680
No clear advantages
Celeron G1610
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop – 224 vs 221 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop
- Is 2 years and 7 months newer – Dec 03, 2012 vs Apr 19, 2010
- Is 2 years and 7 months newer
- Consumes up to 25% less energy – 55 vs 73 Watts
- Consumes up to 25% less energy
Deathloop FPS Calculator
Core i5-680 vs Celeron G1610: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
Celeron G1610
Dec 3rd, 2012
Average FPS
224 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
168 FPS
100%
Price, $
$49
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.21/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i5-680 vs Celeron G1610 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i5-680 vs Celeron G1610 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i5-680
Apr 19th, 2010
Cores
2-core
100%
L3 Cache
4 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.6 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.866 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1333 MHz
100%
Celeron G1610
Dec 3rd, 2012
Cores
2-core
100%
L3 Cache
2 MB
50%
Base Frequency
2.6 GHz
72%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i5-680 Apr 19th, 2010 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Celeron G1610 Dec 3rd, 2012 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Apr 19th, 2010 | Release Date | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
| $294.00 | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1156 | Socket | LGA1155 |
| 73W | Power Consumption | 55W |
| Other Features | ||
| 1333 MHz (DDR3) | RAM | DDR3 |
| Intel HD | Integrated GPU | Intel HD |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
