Key Differences
In short — Ryzen Threadripper 2970WX 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 Threadripper 2970WX is 1127 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G3900.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G3900
- Up to 97% cheaper than Ryzen Threadripper 2970WX - $29.18 vs $840.87
- Up to 96% better value when playing Battlefield V than Ryzen Threadripper 2970WX - $0.15 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
Advantages of AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2970WX
- Performs up to 13% better in Battlefield V than Celeron G3900 - 239 vs 211 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G3900 - 48 vs 2 threads
Battlefield V
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2015
FPS
211
88%
Value, €/FPS
€0.15/FPS
100%
Price, €
€32.39
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €32.39 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 14109 minutes ago
Desktop • Oct 2nd, 2018
FPS
239
100%
Value, €/FPS
€3.91/FPS
3%
Price, €
€933.37
3%
FPS Winner
Buy for €933.37 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 14110 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2015
Desktop • Oct 2nd, 2018
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron G3900 | vs | AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2970WX |
---|---|---|
Sep 1st, 2015 | Release Date | Oct 2nd, 2018 |
Celeron | Collection | Ryzen Threadripper |
Skylake | Codename | Colfax |
Intel Socket 1151 | Socket | AMD Socket SP3r2 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 24 |
2 | Threads | 48 |
2.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.0 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.2 GHz |
51 W | TDP | 250 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 12 nm |
28.0x | Multiplier | 30.0x |
Intel HD 510 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |