Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 3 3100 outperforms Celeron G1620 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Ryzen 3 3100 is 2699 days newer than Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1620
- Consumes up to 15% less energy than AMD Ryzen 3 3100 - 55 vs 65 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen 3 3100 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 3 3100
- Performs up to 11% better in F1 22 than Celeron G1620 - 277 vs 250 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 8 vs 2 threads
F1 22
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Buy for $74.24 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 75744 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Desktop • Apr 24th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
409
27.653820148749155%
Multi-Core
723
14.229482385357214%
Intel Celeron G1620 | vs | AMD Ryzen 3 3100 |
---|---|---|
Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Apr 24th, 2020 |
Celeron | Collection | Ryzen 3 |
Ivy Bridge | Codename | Matisse |
Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | AMD Socket AM4 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 4 |
2 | Threads | 8 |
2.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.6 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.9 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 65 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 7 nm |
27.0x | Multiplier | 36.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |