Key Differences
In short — Core i3-12100F outperforms the cheaper Celeron G1610 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Celeron G1610 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i3-12100F is 3340 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G1610.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610
- Up to 61% cheaper than Core i3-12100F - $37.0 vs $94.98
- Up to 29% better value when playing War Thunder than Core i3-12100F - $0.29 vs $0.41 per FPS
- 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 Intel Core i3-12100F
- Performs up to 81% better in War Thunder than Celeron G1610 - 233 vs 129 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 8 vs 2 threads
War Thunder
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Movie
Buy for $37 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 13738 minutes ago
Desktop • Jan 25th, 2022
FPS
233
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.41/FPS
70%
Price, $
$94.98
38%
FPS Winner
Buy for $94.98 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 13739 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Movie
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Desktop • Jan 25th, 2022
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron G1610 | vs | Intel 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 |
2.6 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 |
26.0x | Multiplier | 33.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | No |