Celeron G4900 vs G1620T

Place in the ranking	2483	2138
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	2.40	2.95
Market segment	Desktop processor	Desktop processor
Series	no data	Intel Celeron
Power efficiency	2.60	2.80
Architecture codename	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)	Coffee Lake (2017−2019)
Release date	1 September 2013 (11 years ago)	3 April 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$42	$42

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Celeron G4900 has 23% better value for money than Celeron G1620T.

Detailed specifications

Celeron G1620T and Celeron G4900 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	2.4 GHz	3.1 GHz
Boost clock speed	2.4 GHz	3.1 GHz
Bus type	no data	DMI 3.0
Bus rate	5 GT/s	4 × 8 GT/s
Multiplier	no data	31
L1 cache	64 KB (per core)	64K (per core)
L2 cache	256 KB (per core)	256K (per core)
L3 cache	2 MB (shared)	6 MB (shared)
Chip lithography	22 nm	14 nm
Die size	94 mm²	126 mm²
Maximum core temperature	no data	100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)	65 °C	72 °C
64 bit support	+	+
Windows 11 compatibility	-	+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron G1620T and Celeron G4900 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 (Uniprocessor)
Socket	FCLGA1155	FCLGA1151
Power consumption (TDP)	35 Watt	54 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G1620T and Celeron G4900. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

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

Security technologies

Celeron G1620T and Celeron G4900 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT	-	-
EDB	+	+
Secure Key	-	+
MPX	-	+
Identity Protection	-	+
SGX	no data	Yes with Intel® ME
OS Guard	no data	+
Anti-Theft	-	no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron G1620T and Celeron G4900 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron G1620T and Celeron G4900. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory types	DDR3	DDR4-2400
Maximum memory size	32 GB	64 GB
Max memory channels	2	2
Maximum memory bandwidth	21 GB/s	38.397 GB/s
ECC memory support	+	+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card	Intel® HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel® Processors	Intel UHD Graphics 610
Max video memory	no data	64 GB
Quick Sync Video	-	+
Clear Video	no data	+
Clear Video HD	-	+
Graphics max frequency	1.05 GHz	1.05 GHz
InTru 3D	-	+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron G1620T and Celeron G4900 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron G1620T and Celeron G4900 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution support	no data	+
Max resolution over HDMI 1.4	no data	4096x2304@24Hz
Max resolution over eDP	no data	4096x2304@60Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPort	no data	4096x2304@60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron G1620T and Celeron G4900 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX	no data	12
OpenGL	no data	4.5

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron G1620T and Celeron G4900.

PCIe version	2.0	3.0
PCI Express lanes	no data	16

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 G1620T 0.96

Celeron G4900 1.51
+57.3%

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 G1620T 1532

Celeron G4900 2394
+56.3%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.96	1.51
Recency	1 September 2013	3 April 2018
Chip lithography	22 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	35 Watt	54 Watt

Celeron G1620T has 54.3% lower power consumption.

Celeron G4900, on the other hand, has a 57.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 57.1% more advanced lithography process.

The Celeron G4900 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron G1620T in performance tests.

Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron G1620T and Celeron G4900, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.