Celeron E3400 vs G1610

Primary details

Comparing Celeron G1610 and Celeron E3400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking	2509	2852
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.03	3.72
Market segment	Desktop processor	Desktop processor
Power efficiency	1.65	0.79
Architecture codename	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)	Wolfdale (2008−2010)
Release date	3 December 2012 (12 years ago)	17 January 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$388	$76

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Celeron E3400 has 12300% better value for money than Celeron G1610.

Detailed specifications

Celeron G1610 and Celeron E3400 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores	2 (Dual-core)	2 (Dual-core)
Threads	2	2
Base clock speed	2.6 GHz	2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed	2.6 GHz	2.6 GHz
Bus rate	5 GT/s	no data
L1 cache	64 KB (per core)	64 KB (per core)
L2 cache	256 KB (per core)	1 MB (shared)
L3 cache	2 MB (shared)	0 KB
Chip lithography	22 nm	45 nm
Die size	94 mm2	82 mm2
Maximum core temperature	no data	74 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)	65 °C	no data
Number of transistors	no data	228 million
64 bit support	+	+
Windows 11 compatibility	-	-
VID voltage range	no data	0.85V-1.3625V

Compatibility

Information on Celeron G1610 and Celeron E3400 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration	1	1
Socket	FCLGA1155	LGA775
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G1610 and Celeron E3400. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions	Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2	no data
AVX	+	-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)	+	+
My WiFi	-	no data
Turbo Boost Technology	-	-
Hyper-Threading Technology	-	-
Idle States	+	+
Thermal Monitoring	+	+

Security technologies

Celeron G1610 and Celeron E3400 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT	-	-
EDB	+	+
Secure Key	-	no data
Anti-Theft	-	no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron G1610 and Celeron E3400 are enumerated here.

VT-d	-	-
VT-x	+	+
EPT	+	no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron G1610 and Celeron E3400. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory types	DDR3	DDR1, DDR2, DDR3
Maximum memory size	32 GB	no data
Max memory channels	2	no data
Maximum memory bandwidth	21 GB/s	no data
ECC memory support	+	-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card	Intel HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel Processors	no data
Graphics max frequency	1.05 GHz	no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron G1610 and Celeron E3400 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported

3

no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron G1610 and Celeron E3400.

PCIe version

2.0

2.0

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.

---

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

---

Pros & cons summary

---

Performance score	0.96	0.54
Recency	3 December 2012	17 January 2010
Chip lithography	22 nm	45 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	65 Watt

---

Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron G1610 and Celeron E3400, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.

---