Celeron G1620 vs Phenom II X3 720

CPU

GPU

Celeron G1620

2 Cores2 Thrd55 WWMax: 2.7 GHz2012

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Phenom II X3 720

3 Cores3 Thrd95 WWMax: 2.8 GHz2010

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Celeron G1620 vs Phenom II X3 720 Performance Spectrum

Celeron G1620

2 / 2

1,586

0.0%

1,600

+0.9%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

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.

Celeron G1620 vs Phenom II X3 720 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Celeron G1620 vs Phenom II X3 720: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Celeron G1620

2012

Why buy it

✅+16.1% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
✅Costs $78 less on MSRP ($52 MSRP vs $130 MSRP).
✅Delivers 147.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 30.5 vs 12.3 PassMark/$ ($52 MSRP vs $130 MSRP).
✅Draws 55W instead of 95W, a 40W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge GT1), while Phenom II X3 720 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (760 vs 980).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (2 MB vs 6 MB).

Phenom II X3 720

2010

Why buy it

✅+28.9% higher Geekbench multi-core.
✅+200% larger total L3 cache (6 MB vs 2 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (380 vs 441).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 12.3 vs 30.5 PassMark/$ ($130 MSRP vs $52 MSRP).
❌72.7% higher power demand at 95W vs 55W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron G1620 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron G1620 better than Phenom II X3 720?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Celeron G1620 is ahead with a 0.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Phenom II X3 720 pulls ahead with 28.9% better Geekbench multi-core. Phenom II X3 720 also has the bigger cache pool with 200% larger total L3 cache (6 MB vs 2 MB).

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Phenom II X3 720 is the stronger fit. You are getting 28.9% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 3 cores and 3 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 200% larger total L3 cache (6 MB vs 2 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Celeron G1620 is the better buy right now. Celeron G1620 comes in $78 cheaper on MSRP at $52 MSRP versus $130 MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Phenom II X3 720 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 28.9% better Geekbench multi-core. It is also 147.8% better value on MSRP (30.5 vs 12.3 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Celeron G1620 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2010). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron G1620 vs Phenom II X3 720 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Celeron G1620

The Celeron G1620 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 2.7 GHz, with boost up to 2.7 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1155. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,586 points. Launch price was $208.

Phenom II X3 720

The Phenom II X3 720 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 1 January 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Heka (2009−2010) architecture. It features 3 cores and 3 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,600 points. Launch price was $75.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron G1620 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Phenom II X3 720 offers 3 cores / 3 threads — the Phenom II X3 720 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2.7 GHz on the Celeron G1620 versus 2.8 GHz on the Phenom II X3 720 — a 3.6% clock advantage for the Phenom II X3 720 (base: 2.7 GHz vs 2.8 GHz). The Celeron G1620 uses the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Phenom II X3 720 uses Heka (2009−2010) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron G1620 scores 1,586 against the Phenom II X3 720's 1,600 — a 0.9% lead for the Phenom II X3 720. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 441 vs 380, a 14.9% lead for the Celeron G1620 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 760 vs 980 (25.3% advantage for the Phenom II X3 720). L3 cache: 2 MB (total) on the Celeron G1620 vs 6 MB (total) on the Phenom II X3 720.

Feature	Celeron G1620	Phenom II X3 720
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	3 / 3+50%
Boost Clock	2.7 GHz	2.8 GHz+4%
Base Clock	2.7 GHz	2.8 GHz+4%
L3 Cache	2 MB (total)	6 MB (total)+200%
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	512 kB (per core)+100%
Process	22 nm-51%	45 nm
Architecture	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)	Heka (2009−2010)
PassMark	1,586	1,600
Geekbench 6 Single	441+16%	380
Geekbench 6 Multi	760	980+29%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron G1620 uses the LGA1155 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Phenom II X3 720 uses AM3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1333 memory speed. The Celeron G1620 supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 16 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: H77,B75,Z77,H61,P67,Z68 (Celeron G1620) and AM3,AM2+ (Phenom II X3 720).

Feature	Celeron G1620	Phenom II X3 720
Socket	LGA1155	AM3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	DDR3-1333
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB+100%	16 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Phenom II X3 720 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: VT-x, EPT (Celeron G1620) vs AMD-V (Phenom II X3 720). The Celeron G1620 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge GT1)), while the Phenom II X3 720 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G1620 targets Desktop, Phenom II X3 720 targets Legacy Desktop. Direct competitor: Celeron G1620 rivals Pentium G2030.

Feature	Celeron G1620	Phenom II X3 720
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge GT1)	None
Unlocked	No	Yes
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, EPT	AMD-V
Target Use	Desktop	Legacy Desktop

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Celeron G1620 was priced at $52, while the Phenom II X3 720 came in at $130. On launch pricing ($52 vs $130), Celeron G1620 was $78 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron G1620 delivers 30.5 pts/$ vs 12.3 pts/$ for the Phenom II X3 720 — making the Celeron G1620 the 85% better value option.

Feature	Celeron G1620	Phenom II X3 720
MSRP	$52-60%	$130
Performance per Dollar	30.5+148%	12.3
Release Date	2012	2010

Search Celeron G1620 on Amazon

Search Phenom II X3 720 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.