Celeron G1620 vs Phenom II X4 N970

Aggregate performance score

Phenom II X4 N970
2010
4 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
1.06
+6%
Celeron G1620
2012
2 cores / 2 threads, 55 Watt
1.00

Phenom II X4 N970 outperforms Celeron G1620 by a small 6% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Phenom II X4 N970 and Celeron G1620 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking24332467
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.03
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
Series4x AMD Phenom IIno data
Power efficiency2.811.69
Architecture codenameChamplain (2010−2011)Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
Release date16 December 2010 (13 years ago)3 December 2012 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$208

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Phenom II X4 N970 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speedno data2.7 GHz
Boost clock speed2.2 GHz2.7 GHz
Bus rate3600 MHz5 GT/s
L1 cache512 KB64 KB (per core)
L2 cache2 MB256 KB (per core)
L3 cacheno data2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nm22 nm
Die sizeno data94 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data65 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Phenom II X4 N970 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 configurationno data1
SocketS1FCLGA1155
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt55 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom II X4 N970 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

Phenom II X4 N970 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 Phenom II X4 N970 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 Phenom II X4 N970 and Celeron G1620. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3
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 Phenom II X4 N970 and Celeron G1620 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Phenom II X4 N970 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.

Phenom II X4 N970 1.06
+6%
Celeron G1620 1.00

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.

Phenom II X4 N970 1647
+5.6%
Celeron G1620 1560

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.

Phenom II X4 N970 263
Celeron G1620 415
+57.8%

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.

Phenom II X4 N970 934
+28.8%
Celeron G1620 725

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.06 1.00
Recency 16 December 2010 3 December 2012
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 45 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 55 Watt

Phenom II X4 N970 has a 6% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and 57.1% lower power consumption.

Celeron G1620, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and a 104.5% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Phenom II X4 N970 and Celeron G1620.

Be aware that Phenom II X4 N970 is a notebook processor while Celeron G1620 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom II X4 N970 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 Phenom II X4 N970
Phenom II X4 N970
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.


4.4 72 votes

Rate Phenom II X4 N970 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 Phenom II X4 N970 or Celeron G1620, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.