Celeron G1610T
VS
Celeron 3865U

Celeron G1610T vs Celeron 3865U

Intel

Celeron G1610T

2 Cores2 Thrd35 WWMax: 2.3 GHz2012
VS
Intel

Celeron 3865U

2 Cores2 Thrd15 WWMax: 1.8 GHz2017

Performance Spectrum - CPU

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Celeron G1610T is positioned at rank 575 and the Celeron 3865U is on rank 645, so the Celeron G1610T offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Celeron G1610T

#1
Ryzen 9 7950X
MSRP: $194|Avg: $20
9821%
#2
Core i9-10900T
MSRP: $120|Avg: $5
9280%
#3
Ryzen 3 PRO 4355GE
MSRP: $423|Avg: $5
6738%
#4
Ryzen Threadripper 3960X
MSRP: $1399|Avg: $85
2030%
#5
Ryzen 9 9950X
MSRP: $649|Avg: $129
1608%
#6
Ryzen 5 8400F
MSRP: $303|Avg: $55
1407%
#7
Ryzen 7 PRO 2700
MSRP: $299|Avg: $60
806%
#8
Ryzen 5 2600X
MSRP: $229|Avg: $55
795%
#9
Ryzen 3 PRO 5350G
MSRP: $150|Avg: $60
724%
#10
Core Ultra 5 245KF
MSRP: $294|Avg: $189
724%
#11
Ryzen 5 5500
MSRP: $159|Avg: $85
716%
#12
Ryzen 5 3600
MSRP: $199|Avg: $80
696%
#13
Core i3-9100E
MSRP: $202|Avg: $30
687%
#14
Core Ultra 5 245K
MSRP: $319|Avg: $200
684%
#15
Core i3-8300T
MSRP: $138|Avg: $25
678%
#278
Ryzen Threadripper 1900X
MSRP: $549|Avg: $116
97%
#575
Celeron G1610T
MSRP: $42|Avg: $42
100%
#576
Athlon X4 750K
MSRP: $91|Avg: $17
100%
#577
Core i7-7700K
MSRP: $305|Avg: $140
99%
#578
Core i5-7600K
MSRP: $217|Avg: $84
99%
#579
FX-6300
MSRP: $132|Avg: $35
99%
#581
Core i3-6100T
MSRP: $117|Avg: $20
98%
#582
Athlon X4 970
MSRP: $85|Avg: $85
98%
#583
FX-8370
MSRP: $199|Avg: $100
98%
#584
Pentium G4520
MSRP: $86|Avg: $45
98%
#585
Core i3-4170
MSRP: $117|Avg: $40
98%
#586
Celeron G460
MSRP: $37|Avg: $10
98%
#587
A4 PRO-7350B
MSRP: $50|Avg: $11
97%
#589
Pentium G3220T
MSRP: $54|Avg: $15
96%
#590
Celeron G1620
MSRP: $52|Avg: $40
96%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Celeron 3865U

#633
Atom x5-Z8300
MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A
874%
#634
Atom Z3735G
MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A
861%
#635
Core i5-480M
MSRP: $81|Avg: $77
790%
#636
Core i5-460M
MSRP: $80|Avg: $129
787%
#637
Core i5-2540M
MSRP: $266|Avg: $10
780%
#639
Core i5-450M
MSRP: $32|Avg: $31
753%
#640
Core i3-380M
MSRP: $49|Avg: $25
722%
#641
Core i5-430M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33
721%
#642
Core 2 Duo T6600
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4
701%
#645
Celeron 3865U
MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A
100%
#650
Core i5-1345UE
MSRP: $312|Avg: $312
99%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Generational Difference: This comparison involves processors from different technological eras. The Celeron 3865U (2017) utilizes 14 nm technology and DDR3, DDR4, providing a fundamental performance advantage.
InsightCeleron G1610TCeleron 3865U
Gaming
Superior gaming performance
Lower gaming performance
Workstation
Weaker in multi-core tasks
Better multi-core power
Price
⚠️ Higher cost ($42)
More affordable ($0)
Longevity
🛑 Legacy (Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) / 22 nm)
✨ Modern (Kaby Lake-U (2017) / 14 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

The Celeron G1610T (2012) relies on 22 nm technology and DDR3, placing it in a different performance category relative to modern standards.
InsightCeleron G1610TCeleron 3865U
Cost Efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost
⚠️ Higher cost ($42)
More affordable ($0)

Performance Check

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Celeron G1610T and Celeron 3865U

Intel

Celeron G1610T

The Celeron G1610T is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 December 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.3 GHz, with boost up to 2.3 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1155. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,333 points. Launch price was $89.

Intel

Celeron 3865U

The Celeron 3865U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 January 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Kaby Lake-U (2017) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1356. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,343 points. Launch price was $107.

Processing Power

Both the Celeron G1610T and Celeron 3865U share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.3 GHz on the Celeron G1610T versus 1.8 GHz on the Celeron 3865U — a 24.4% clock advantage for the Celeron G1610T (base: 2.3 GHz vs 1.8 GHz). The Celeron G1610T uses the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Celeron 3865U uses Kaby Lake-U (2017) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron G1610T scores 1,333 against the Celeron 3865U's 1,343 — a 0.7% lead for the Celeron 3865U. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 393 vs 389, a 1% lead for the Celeron G1610T that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 674 vs 674 (0% advantage for the Celeron 3865U). Both processors carry 2 MB (total) of L3 cache.

FeatureCeleron G1610TCeleron 3865U
Cores / Threads
2 / 2
2 / 2
Boost Clock
2.3 GHz+28%
1.8 GHz
Base Clock
2.3 GHz+28%
1.8 GHz
L3 Cache
2 MB (total)
2 MB (total)
L2 Cache
256 kB (per core)
256K (per core)
Process
22 nm
14 nm-36%
Architecture
Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
Kaby Lake-U (2017)
PassMark
1,333
1,343
Geekbench 6 Single
393+1%
389
Geekbench 6 Multi
674
674
🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron G1610T uses the LGA1155 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron 3865U uses BGA1356 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the Celeron G1610T versus DDR4-2133 / LPDDR3-1866 on the Celeron 3865U — the Celeron 3865U supports 28.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 32 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Celeron G1610T) vs 10 (Celeron 3865U) — the Celeron G1610T offers 6 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H61,B75,H77,Z77 (Celeron G1610T) and 100-series,200-series (Celeron 3865U).

FeatureCeleron G1610TCeleron 3865U
Socket
LGA1155
BGA1356
PCIe Generation
PCIe 3.0
PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed
DDR3-1333
DDR4-2133 / LPDDR3-1866+33%
Max RAM Capacity
32 GB
32 GB
RAM Channels
2
2
ECC Support
PCIe Lanes
16+60%
10
🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron G1610T) vs VT-x / VT-d / EPT (Celeron 3865U). Both include integrated graphics HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) (Celeron G1610T) and Intel HD Graphics 610 (Celeron 3865U) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G1610T targets Budget, Celeron 3865U targets Entry-level. Direct competitor: Celeron G1610T rivals Pentium G2020T; Celeron 3865U rivals Pentium Gold 4415U.

FeatureCeleron G1610TCeleron 3865U
Integrated GPU
Yes
Yes
IGPU Model
HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)
Intel HD Graphics 610
Unlocked
No
No
AVX-512
No
No
Virtualization
VT-x
VT-x / VT-d / EPT
Target Use
Budget
Entry-level