Ryzen 7 7700 vs Celeron G1610

Place in the ranking	2507	243
Place by popularity	not in top-100	83
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.03	51.48
Market segment	Desktop processor	Desktop processor
Series	no data	AMD Ryzen 7
Power efficiency	1.65	31.72
Architecture codename	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)	Raphael (Zen4) (2022−2023)
Release date	3 December 2012 (12 years ago)	14 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$388	$339

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen 7 7700 has 171500% better value for money than Celeron G1610.

Detailed specifications

Celeron G1610 and Ryzen 7 7700 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)	8 (Octa-Core)
Threads	2	16
Base clock speed	2.6 GHz	3.8 GHz
Boost clock speed	2.6 GHz	5.3 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 (per core)
L3 cache	2 MB (shared)	32 MB (shared)
Chip lithography	22 nm	5 nm, 6 nm
Die size	94 mm²	71 mm²
Maximum core temperature	no data	95 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)	65 °C	61 °C
Number of transistors	no data	6,570 million
64 bit support	+	+
Windows 11 compatibility	-	+
Unlocked multiplier	-	+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron G1610 and Ryzen 7 7700 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	AM5
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G1610 and Ryzen 7 7700. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions	Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2	5 nm, 0.650 - 1.475V
AES-NI	-	+
AVX	+	+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)	+	no data
My WiFi	-	no data
Turbo Boost Technology	-	no data
Hyper-Threading Technology	-	no data
Idle States	+	no data
Thermal Monitoring	+	-
Precision Boost 2	no data	+

Security technologies

Celeron G1610 and Ryzen 7 7700 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

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

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron G1610 and Ryzen 7 7700 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron G1610 and Ryzen 7 7700. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory types	DDR3	DDR5-5200
Maximum memory size	32 GB	128 GB
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 Compare	Intel HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel Processors	AMD Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000) (400 - 2200 MHz)
Graphics max frequency	1.05 GHz	no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron G1610 and Ryzen 7 7700 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported

no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron G1610 and Ryzen 7 7700.

PCIe version	2.0	5.0
PCI Express lanes	no data	24

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.

Celeron G1610 0.96

Ryzen 7 7700 21.80
+2171%

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Celeron G1610 1526

Ryzen 7 7700 34633
+2170%

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Celeron G1610 413

Ryzen 7 7700 2876
+596%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Celeron G1610 690

Ryzen 7 7700 14931
+2064%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.96	21.80
Integrated graphics card	0.77	4.43
Recency	3 December 2012	14 January 2023
Physical cores	2	8
Threads	2	16
Chip lithography	22 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	65 Watt

Celeron G1610 has 18.2% lower power consumption.

Ryzen 7 7700, on the other hand, has a 2170.8% higher aggregate performance score, 475.3% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 10 years, 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 340% more advanced lithography process.

The Ryzen 7 7700 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron G1610 in performance tests.

Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron G1610 and Ryzen 7 7700, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.