Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 5 3500X outperforms the cheaper Celeron G1620 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Ryzen 5 3500X is 2486 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1620
- Up to 46% cheaper than Ryzen 5 3500X - $49.0 vs $90.39
- Consumes up to 15% less energy than AMD Ryzen 5 3500X - 55 vs 65 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen 5 3500X doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 5 3500X
- Performs up to 17% better in Valorant than Celeron G1620 - 793 vs 680 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 6 vs 2 threads
Valorant
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Buy for $49 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 85 minutes ago
Buy for $90.39 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 90 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Desktop • Sep 24th, 2019
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
409
26.302250803858524%
Multi-Core
723
12.35897435897436%
Intel Celeron G1620 | vs | AMD Ryzen 5 3500X |
---|---|---|
Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Sep 24th, 2019 |
Celeron | Collection | Ryzen 5 |
Ivy Bridge | Codename | Matisse |
Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | AMD Socket AM4 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 6 |
2 | Threads | 6 |
2.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.6 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.1 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 |