Key Differences
In short — Celeron G3900 outperforms the cheaper FX-4300 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing FX-4300 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Celeron G3900 is 1043 days newer than the cheaper FX-4300.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G3900
- Performs up to 1% better in Dead Space than FX-4300 - 145 vs 144 FPS
- Consumes up to 46% less energy than AMD FX-4300 - 51 vs 95 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-4300 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD FX-4300
- Up to 45% cheaper than Celeron G3900 - €29.22 vs €53.15
- Up to 46% better value when playing Dead Space than Celeron G3900 - €0.2 vs €0.37 per FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G3900 - 4 vs 2 threads
Dead Space
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Buy for €53.15 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 19043 minutes ago
Buy for €29.22 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 19043 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2015
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron G3900 | vs | AMD FX-4300 |
---|---|---|
Sep 1st, 2015 | Release Date | Oct 23rd, 2012 |
Celeron | Collection | FX |
Skylake | Codename | Vishera |
Intel Socket 1151 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 4 |
2 | Threads | 4 |
2.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.8 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.0 GHz |
51 W | TDP | 95 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
28.0x | Multiplier | 19.0x |
Intel HD 510 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |