Key Differences
In short — Core i5-8400 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 i5-8400 is 1767 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G1610.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610
- Up to 72% cheaper than Core i5-8400 - $37.0 vs $130.73
- Up to 71% better value when playing Valorant than Core i5-8400 - $0.05 vs $0.17 per FPS
- Consumes up to 15% less energy than Intel Core i5-8400 - 55 vs 65 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i5-8400 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Core i5-8400
- Performs up to 13% better in Valorant than Celeron G1610 - 770 vs 681 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 6 vs 2 threads
Valorant
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Buy for $37 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 10268 minutes ago
Buy for $130.73 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 10269 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Desktop • Oct 5th, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron G1610 | vs | Intel Core i5-8400 |
---|---|---|
Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Oct 5th, 2017 |
Celeron | Collection | Core i5 |
Ivy Bridge | Codename | Coffee Lake |
Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 6 |
2 | Threads | 6 |
2.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.8 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.0 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 65 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
26.0x | Multiplier | 28.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | No |