Key Differences
In short — Core i3-10320 outperforms the cheaper Celeron G4900 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Celeron G4900 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i3-10320 is 758 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G4900.
Advantages of Intel Core i3-10320
- Performs up to 17% better in New World than Celeron G4900 - 117 vs 100 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G4900 - 8 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G4900
- Up to 62% cheaper than Core i3-10320 - $53.55 vs $139.99
- Up to 55% better value when playing New World than Core i3-10320 - $0.54 vs $1.2 per FPS
- Consumes up to 17% less energy than Intel Core i3-10320 - 54 vs 65 Watts
New World
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
117
100%
Value, $/FPS
$1.2/FPS
45.00000000000001%
Price, $
$139.99
38%
FPS Winner
Buy for $139.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 19 minutes ago
Desktop • Apr 3rd, 2018
FPS
100
85.47008547008546%
Value, $/FPS
$0.54/FPS
100%
Price, $
$53.55
100%
Value Winner
Buy for $53.55 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 17 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Desktop • Apr 3rd, 2018
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Desktop • Apr 3rd, 2018
Single-Core
616
40.02599090318388%
Multi-Core
1051
22.719412019022915%
Intel Core i3-10320 | vs | Intel Celeron G4900 |
---|---|---|
Apr 30th, 2020 | Release Date | Apr 3rd, 2018 |
Core i3 | Collection | Celeron |
Comet Lake | Codename | Coffee Lake |
Intel Socket 1200 | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 2 |
8 | Threads | 2 |
3.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.1 GHz |
4.6 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
65 W | TDP | 54 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
38.0x | Multiplier | 31.0x |
UHD Graphics 630 | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 610 |
No | Overclockable | No |