Ultra 9 288V vs Celeron G1620

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron G1620
2012
2 cores / 2 threads, 55 Watt
0.99
Core Ultra 9 288V
2024
8 cores / 8 threads, 30 Watt
12.59
+1172%

Core Ultra 9 288V outperforms Celeron G1620 by a whopping 1172% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron G1620 and Core Ultra 9 288V processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2480617
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.05no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Power efficiency1.7039.72
Architecture codenameIvy Bridge (2012−2013)Lunar Lake (2024)
Release date3 December 2012 (12 years ago)24 September 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$208no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron G1620 and Core Ultra 9 288V 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 cores2 (Dual-core)8 (Octa-Core)
Performance-coresno data4
Low Power Efficient-coresno data4
Threads28
Base clock speed2.7 GHz3.3 GHz
Boost clock speed2.7 GHz5.1 GHz
Bus rate5 GT/s37 MHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)192 KB (per core)
L2 cache256 KB (per core)2.5 MB (per core)
L3 cache2 MB (shared)12 MB (shared)
Chip lithography22 nm3 nm
Die size94 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)65 °Cno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron G1620 and Core Ultra 9 288V 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 configuration11
SocketFCLGA1155FCBGA2833
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt30 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G1620 and Core Ultra 9 288V. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI-+
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data+
My WiFi-no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology--
TSX-+
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring++
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data+
Deep Learning Boost-+
Supported AI Software Frameworks-OpenVINO™, WindowsML, DirectML, ONNX RT, WebNN

Security technologies

Celeron G1620 and Core Ultra 9 288V technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

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

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron G1620 and Core Ultra 9 288V are enumerated here.

VT-d-+
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron G1620 and Core Ultra 9 288V. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR5
Maximum memory size32 GB32 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth21 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel ProcessorsIntel Arc Graphics 140V
Quick Sync Video-+
Graphics max frequency1.05 GHz2.05 GHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron G1620 and Core Ultra 9 288V integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported33

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron G1620 and Core Ultra 9 288V integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4096 x 2304 @ 60Hz (HDMI 2.1 TMDS) 7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz (HDMI2.1 FRL)
Max resolution over eDPno data3840x2400 @ 120Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron G1620 and Core Ultra 9 288V integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12.2
OpenGLno data4.6

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron G1620 and Core Ultra 9 288V.

PCIe version2.05.0
PCI Express lanesno data4
PCI supportno data5.0 and 4.0

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.

Celeron G1620 0.99
Ultra 9 288V 12.59
+1172%

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 G1620 1571
Ultra 9 288V 20000
+1173%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.99 12.59
Integrated graphics card 0.77 13.28
Recency 3 December 2012 24 September 2024
Physical cores 2 8
Threads 2 8
Chip lithography 22 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 30 Watt

Ultra 9 288V has a 1171.7% higher aggregate performance score, 1624.7% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 11 years, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, a 633.3% more advanced lithography process, and 83.3% lower power consumption.

The Core Ultra 9 288V is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron G1620 in performance tests.

Note that Celeron G1620 is a desktop processor while Core Ultra 9 288V is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron G1620 and Core Ultra 9 288V, 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.


Intel Celeron G1620
Celeron G1620
Intel Core Ultra 9 288V
Core Ultra 9 288V

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.4 84 votes

Rate Celeron G1620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 36 votes

Rate Core Ultra 9 288V on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron G1620 or Core Ultra 9 288V, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.