Key Differences
In short — Core i5-9600 outperforms the cheaper Celeron G1620 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Celeron G1620 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i5-9600 is 2146 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Intel Core i5-9600
- Performs up to 7% better in Deathloop than Celeron G1620 - 179 vs 167 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 6 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1620
- Up to 61% cheaper than Core i5-9600 - $49.0 vs $125.0
- Up to 59% better value when playing Deathloop than Core i5-9600 - $0.29 vs $0.7 per FPS
- Consumes up to 15% less energy than Intel Core i5-9600 - 55 vs 65 Watts
Deathloop
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Oct 19th, 2018
FPS
179
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.7/FPS
41.42857142857142%
Price, $
$125
39%
FPS Winner
Buy for $125 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 28 minutes ago
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
FPS
167
93.29608938547486%
Value, $/FPS
$0.29/FPS
100%
Price, $
$49
100%
Value Winner
Buy for $49 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 27 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Oct 19th, 2018
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
409
27.975376196990425%
Multi-Core
723
14.623786407766989%
Intel Core i5-9600 | vs | Intel Celeron G1620 |
---|---|---|
Oct 19th, 2018 | Release Date | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
Core i5 | Collection | Celeron |
Coffee Lake | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
Intel Socket 1151 | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 2 |
6 | Threads | 2 |
3.1 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.7 GHz |
4.6 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
65 W | TDP | 55 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
31.0x | Multiplier | 27.0x |
UHD 630 | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD |
No | Overclockable | No |