Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 5 2600 outperforms the cheaper Celeron G3900 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Celeron G3900 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Ryzen 5 2600 is 961 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G3900.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G3900
- Up to 53% cheaper than Ryzen 5 2600 - $29.18 vs $62.7
- Up to 49% better value when playing Total War: WARHAMMER III than Ryzen 5 2600 - $0.21 vs $0.41 per FPS
- Consumes up to 22% less energy than AMD Ryzen 5 2600 - 51 vs 65 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen 5 2600 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 5 2600
- Performs up to 9% better in Total War: WARHAMMER III than Celeron G3900 - 168 vs 154 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G3900 - 12 vs 2 threads
Total War: WARHAMMER III
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2015
FPS
154
91%
Value, €/FPS
€0.21/FPS
100%
Price, €
€32.39
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €32.39 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 16577 minutes ago
Buy for €69.6 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 16578 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2015
Desktop • Apr 19th, 2018
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron G3900 | vs | AMD Ryzen 5 2600 |
---|---|---|
Sep 1st, 2015 | Release Date | Apr 19th, 2018 |
Celeron | Collection | Ryzen 5 |
Skylake | Codename | Pinnacle Ridge |
Intel Socket 1151 | Socket | AMD Socket AM4 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 6 |
2 | Threads | 12 |
2.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.4 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.9 GHz |
51 W | TDP | 65 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 12 nm |
28.0x | Multiplier | 34.0x |
Intel HD 510 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |