Key Differences
In short — Core i5-11600KF 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 Core i5-11600KF is 2023 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G3900.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G3900
- Up to 89% cheaper than Core i5-11600KF - £19.99 vs £179.9
- Up to 83% better value when playing Starfield than Core i5-11600KF - £0.43 vs £2.53 per FPS
- Consumes up to 59% less energy than Intel Core i5-11600KF - 51 vs 125 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i5-11600KF doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Core i5-11600KF
- Performs up to 54% better in Starfield than Celeron G3900 - 71 vs 46 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G3900 - 12 vs 2 threads
Starfield
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2015
FPS
46
64%
Value, £/FPS
£0.43/FPS
100%
Price, £
£19.99
100%
Value Winner
Buy for £19.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 13577 minutes ago
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
FPS
71
100%
Value, £/FPS
£2.53/FPS
16%
Price, £
£179.9
11%
FPS Winner
Buy for £179.9 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 13577 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2015
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron G3900 | vs | Intel Core i5-11600KF |
---|---|---|
Sep 1st, 2015 | Release Date | Mar 16th, 2021 |
Celeron | Collection | Core i5 |
Skylake | Codename | Rocket Lake |
Intel Socket 1151 | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 6 |
2 | Threads | 12 |
2.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.9 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.9 GHz |
51 W | TDP | 125 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
28.0x | Multiplier | 39.0x |
Intel HD 510 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |