Key Differences
In short — Celeron G3900 outperforms Celeron G1620 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Celeron G3900 is 1002 days newer than Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G3900
- Performs up to 5% better in Rust than Celeron G1620 - 159 vs 152 FPS
- Consumes up to 7% less energy than Intel Celeron G1620 - 51 vs 55 Watts
Rust
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2015
FPS
159
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.25/FPS
100%
Price, $
$39.9
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for $39.9 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 12016 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2015
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron G1620 | vs | Intel Celeron G3900 |
---|---|---|
Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Sep 1st, 2015 |
Celeron | Collection | Celeron |
Ivy Bridge | Codename | Skylake |
Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 2 |
2 | Threads | 2 |
2.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.8 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
55 W | TDP | 51 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
27.0x | Multiplier | 28.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 510 |
No | Overclockable | No |