Buy on Amazon
$37
In Stock
Availability
Availability
Availability
Availability
Key Differences
In short — Core i9-7960X 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 i9-7960X is 1733 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G1610.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610
- Up to 89% cheaper than Core i9-7960X - $37.0 vs $347.48
- Up to 88% better value when playing Escape From Tarkov than Core i9-7960X - $0.2 vs $1.68 per FPS
- Consumes up to 67% less energy than Intel Core i9-7960X - 55 vs 165 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i9-7960X doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Core i9-7960X
- Performs up to 10% better in Escape From Tarkov than Celeron G1610 - 207 vs 188 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 32 vs 2 threads
Escape From Tarkov
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Intel Celeron G1610 2.60GHz LGA 1155 Processor BX80637G1610
Buy for $37 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 194 minutes ago
Intel Core i9-7960X X-Series Processor 16 Cores up to 4.2 GHz Turbo Unlocked LGA2066 X299 Series 165W
Buy for $347.48 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 195 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Celeron G1610
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Core i9-7960X
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron G1610 | vs | Intel Core i9-7960X |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Sep 1st, 2017 |
| Celeron | Collection | Core i9 |
| Ivy Bridge | Codename | Skylake |
| Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | Intel Socket 2066 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| 2 | Cores | 16 |
| 2 | Threads | 32 |
| 2.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.8 GHz |
| Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.2 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 165 W |
| 22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
| 26.0x | Multiplier | 28.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | Yes |
Similar CPU Comparisons
Select from the most popular similar processor comparisons. Most compared processor combinations, including the currently selected ones, are at the top.
