Key Differences
In short — Celeron G4900 outperforms the cheaper Phenom II X4 830 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Phenom II X4 830 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Celeron G4900 is 3136 days newer than the cheaper Phenom II X4 830.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G4900
- Performs up to 5% better in Total War: WARHAMMER III than Phenom II X4 830 - 155 vs 147 FPS
- Consumes up to 43% less energy than AMD Phenom II X4 830 - 54 vs 95 Watts
Advantages of AMD Phenom II X4 830
- Up to 54% cheaper than Celeron G4900 - €27.62 vs €60.24
- Up to 51% better value when playing Total War: WARHAMMER III than Celeron G4900 - €0.19 vs €0.39 per FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G4900 - 4 vs 2 threads
Total War: WARHAMMER III
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Buy for €60.24 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 103 minutes ago
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2009
FPS
147
94%
Value, €/FPS
€0.19/FPS
100%
Price, €
€27.62
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €27.62 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 103 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Apr 3rd, 2018
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2009
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron G4900 | vs | AMD Phenom II X4 830 |
---|---|---|
Apr 3rd, 2018 | Release Date | Sep 1st, 2009 |
Celeron | Collection | Phenom II X4 |
Coffee Lake | Codename | Deneb |
Intel Socket 1151 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 4 |
2 | Threads | 4 |
3.1 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.8 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
54 W | TDP | 95 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 45 nm |
31.0x | Multiplier | 14.0x |
UHD Graphics 610 | Integrated Graphics | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
No | Overclockable | No |