Key Differences
In short — Ryzen Threadripper 2970WX outperforms the cheaper Celeron G3930 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Celeron G3930 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Ryzen Threadripper 2970WX is 637 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G3930.
Advantages of AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2970WX
- Performs up to 13% better in Battlefield V than Celeron G3930 - 239 vs 212 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G3930 - 48 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G3930
- Up to 94% cheaper than Ryzen Threadripper 2970WX - $46.74 vs $840.87
- Up to 94% better value when playing Battlefield V than Ryzen Threadripper 2970WX - $0.24 vs $3.91 per FPS
- Consumes up to 80% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2970WX - 51 vs 250 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2970WX doesn't have integrated graphics
Battlefield V
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Oct 2nd, 2018
FPS
239
100%
Value, €/FPS
€3.91/FPS
6%
Price, €
€933.37
5%
FPS Winner
Buy for €933.37 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 58 minutes ago
Desktop • Jan 3rd, 2017
FPS
212
88%
Value, €/FPS
€0.24/FPS
100%
Price, €
€51.88
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €51.88 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 55 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Oct 2nd, 2018
Desktop • Jan 3rd, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2970WX | vs | Intel Celeron G3930 |
---|---|---|
Oct 2nd, 2018 | Release Date | Jan 3rd, 2017 |
Ryzen Threadripper | Collection | Celeron |
Colfax | Codename | Kaby Lake |
AMD Socket SP3r2 | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
24 | Cores | 2 |
48 | Threads | 2 |
3.0 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.9 GHz |
4.2 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
250 W | TDP | 51 W |
12 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
30.0x | Multiplier | 29.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 610 |
Yes | Overclockable | No |