Key Differences
In short — FX-6300 outperforms Celeron G1620 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing FX-6300 is 41 days older than Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1620
- Consumes up to 42% less energy than AMD FX-6300 - 55 vs 95 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-6300 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD FX-6300
- Performs up to 1% better in FINAL FANTASY XIV: Endwalker than Celeron G1620 - 224 vs 222 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 6 vs 2 threads
FINAL FANTASY XIV: Endwalker
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Maximum
Buy for $58.02 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 76024 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Maximum
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
409
88.33693304535637%
Multi-Core
723
49.75911906400551%
Intel Celeron G1620 | vs | AMD FX-6300 |
---|---|---|
Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Oct 23rd, 2012 |
Celeron | Collection | FX |
Ivy Bridge | Codename | Vishera |
Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 6 |
2 | Threads | 6 |
2.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.1 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 95 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
27.0x | Multiplier | 17.5x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |