Celeron G1620 vs Athlon 64 FX-62

VS

Aggregate performance score

Athlon 64 FX-62
2006
2 cores / 2 threads, 125 Watt
0.63
Celeron G1620
2012
2 cores / 2 threads, 55 Watt
0.99
+57.1%

Celeron G1620 outperforms Athlon 64 FX-62 by an impressive 57% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Athlon 64 (Desktop) FX-62 and Celeron G1620 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking27872479
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.05
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesAthlon 64 (Desktop)no data
Power efficiency0.481.70
Architecture codenameWindsor (2006−2007)Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
Release dateno data3 December 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$208

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Athlon 64 (Desktop) FX-62 and Celeron G1620 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speedno data2.7 GHz
Boost clock speed2.8 GHz2.7 GHz
Bus rate1000 MHz5 GT/s
L1 cache256 KB64 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB256 KB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography90 nm22 nm
Die size220 mm294 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data65 °C
Number of transistors243 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Athlon 64 (Desktop) FX-62 and Celeron G1620 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
SocketAM2FCLGA1155
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt55 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 (Desktop) FX-62 and Celeron G1620. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
My WiFino data-
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+

Security technologies

Athlon 64 (Desktop) FX-62 and Celeron G1620 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data-
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon 64 (Desktop) FX-62 and Celeron G1620 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 (Desktop) FX-62 and Celeron G1620. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1DDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data32 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data21 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel Processors
Graphics max frequencyno data1.05 GHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Athlon 64 (Desktop) FX-62 and Celeron G1620 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon 64 (Desktop) FX-62 and Celeron G1620.

PCIe versionno data2.0

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.

Athlon 64 FX-62 0.63
Celeron G1620 0.99
+57.1%

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.

Athlon 64 FX-62 993
Celeron G1620 1571
+58.2%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.63 0.99
Chip lithography 90 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 55 Watt

Celeron G1620 has a 57.1% higher aggregate performance score, a 309.1% more advanced lithography process, and 127.3% lower power consumption.

The Celeron G1620 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon 64 FX-62 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 FX-62 and Celeron G1620, 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.


AMD Athlon 64 FX-62
Athlon 64 FX-62
Intel Celeron G1620
Celeron G1620

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 10 votes

Rate Athlon 64 FX-62 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 84 votes

Rate Celeron G1620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon 64 FX-62 or Celeron G1620, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.