Celeron G1620 vs Phenom X4 9500

Celeron G1620 vs Phenom X4 9500 Performance Spectrum

Celeron G1620

2 / 2

1,586

+1.4%

1,564

0.0%

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 X4 9500 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 X4 9500: 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

✅Costs $195 less on MSRP ($52 MSRP vs $247 MSRP).
✅Delivers 381.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 30.5 vs 6.3 PassMark/$ ($52 MSRP vs $247 MSRP).
✅Draws 55W instead of 95W, a 40W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge GT1), while Phenom X4 9500 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Phenom X4 9500

2007

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,564 vs 1,586).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 6.3 vs 30.5 PassMark/$ ($247 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.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Celeron G1620.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron G1620 better than Phenom X4 9500?

Yes. Celeron G1620 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 2.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 1.4% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron G1620 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 2.8% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron G1620 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.4% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron G1620 is the better buy right now. Celeron G1620 comes in $195 cheaper on MSRP at $52 MSRP versus $247 MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 381.7% better value on MSRP (30.5 vs 6.3 PassMark/$), 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 2007) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron G1620 vs Phenom X4 9500 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 X4 9500

The Phenom X4 9500 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Agena (2007−2008) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Max frequency: 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: AM2+. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,564 points. Launch price was $149.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron G1620 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Phenom X4 9500 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Phenom X4 9500 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.7 GHz on the Celeron G1620 versus 2.2 GHz on the Phenom X4 9500 — a 20.4% clock advantage for the Celeron G1620. The Celeron G1620 uses the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Phenom X4 9500 uses Agena (2007−2008) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron G1620 scores 1,586 against the Phenom X4 9500's 1,564 — a 1.4% lead for the Celeron G1620. Both processors carry 2 MB (total) of L3 cache.

Feature	Celeron G1620	Phenom X4 9500
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	2.7 GHz+23%	2.2 GHz
Base Clock	2.7 GHz	—
L3 Cache	2 MB (total)	2 MB (total)
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	512 kB (per core)+100%
Process	22 nm-66%	65 nm
Architecture	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)	Agena (2007−2008)
PassMark	1,586+1%	1,564
Geekbench 6 Single	441	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	760	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron G1620 uses the LGA1155 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Phenom X4 9500 uses AM2+ (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron G1620	Phenom X4 9500
Socket	LGA1155	AM2+
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	—
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	Yes	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, EPT (Celeron G1620) / not specified (Phenom X4 9500). The Celeron G1620 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge GT1)), while the Phenom X4 9500 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G1620 targets Desktop. Direct competitor: Celeron G1620 rivals Pentium G2030.

Feature	Celeron G1620	Phenom X4 9500
Integrated GPU	Yes	—
IGPU Model	Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge GT1)	—
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	VT-x, EPT	—
Target Use	Desktop	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Celeron G1620 was priced at $52, while the Phenom X4 9500 came in at $247. On launch pricing ($52 vs $247), Celeron G1620 was $195 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron G1620 delivers 30.5 pts/$ vs 6.3 pts/$ for the Phenom X4 9500 — making the Celeron G1620 the 131.2% better value option.

Feature	Celeron G1620	Phenom X4 9500
MSRP	$52-79%	$247
Performance per Dollar	30.5+384%	6.3
Release Date	2012	2007

Search Celeron G1620 on Amazon

Search Phenom X4 9500 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.