Intel Celeron G1610T vs AMD Turion II Neo N54L |
Released January, 2013
Intel Celeron G1610T
- 2.3 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Intel Celeron G1610T
 | Much newer manufacturing process 22 nm | | Better geekbench 3 single core score 1,710 |
| | Newer Jan, 2013 | | Slightly better PassMark score 2,322 |
VS
Released April, 2010
AMD Turion II Neo N54L
- 2.2 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the AMD Turion II Neo N54L
| | Significantly more l2 cache 2 MB | | Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core |
| | Lower typical power consumption 20.31W | | Lower annual commercial energy cost 21.9 $/year |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Intel Celeron G1610TCPUBoss Winner |  | |
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Much newer manufacturing process | 22 nm | vs | 45 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Better geekbench 3 single core score | 1,710 | vs | 1,127 | More than 50% better geekbench 3 single core score | |||
| Newer | Jan, 2013 | vs | Apr, 2010 | Release date over 2 years later | |||
| Slightly better PassMark score | 2,322 | vs | 1,376 | Around 70% better PassMark score | |||
| Better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 2.44 GHz | vs | 2.21 GHz | More than 10% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
| |||||||
| Significantly more l2 cache | 2 MB | vs | 1 MB | 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later | |||
| Much more l2 cache per core | 1 MB/core | vs | 0.5 MB/core | 2x more l2 cache per core | |||
| Lower typical power consumption | 20.31W | vs | 28.44W | Around 30% lower typical power consumption | |||
| Lower annual commercial energy cost | 21.9 $/year | vs | 30.66 $/year | Around 30% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
| Lower annual home energy cost | 6.02 $/year | vs | 8.43 $/year | Around 30% lower annual home energy cost | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron G1610T vs Turion II Neo N54L
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
PassMark (Single Core)
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Celeron G1610T | vs | Turion II Neo N54L |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 2.3 GHz | 2.2 GHz | |
| Cores | Dual core | Dual core | |
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| SSE4a | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE4 | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE | |||
| SSE4.1 | |||
| SSE4.2 | |||
| 3DNow! | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
details | Celeron G1610T | vs | Turion II Neo N54L |
|---|---|---|---|
| Threads | 2 | 2 | |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 2 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 0.5 MB/core | 1 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 22 nm | 45 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclocked clock speed | 2.44 GHz | 2.21 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 2.3 GHz | 2.2 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 2.44 GHz | 2.21 GHz | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 35W | 25W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 8.43 $/year | 6.02 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 30.66 $/year | 21.9 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 3.69 pt/W | 3.44 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 28.44W | 20.31W | |
 Intel Celeron G1610T  Report a correction |  AMD Turion II Neo N54L Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $300 | $305 | |
| Intel Core i5 2500 vs Xeon W3520 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $350 | $272 | |
| Intel Core i7 6700K vs 4790K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| AMD A8 6410 vs Intel Core i5 4200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| AMD A9 7th Gen A9-9410 vs Intel Core i5 6200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $180 | ||
| AMD A6 5200 vs Intel Core i5 3470 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $50 | $125 | |
| AMD A4 5300 vs Intel Core i3 3220 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $161 | $275 | |
| Intel Pentium N3540 vs Core i3 4005U | ||
