Key Differences
In short — Core i5-11400F 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 i5-11400F is 2023 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G3900.
Advantages of Intel Core i5-11400F
- Performs up to 66% better in F1 23 than Celeron G3900 - 260 vs 157 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G3900 - 12 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G3900
- Up to 85% cheaper than Core i5-11400F - £19.99 vs £132.79
- Up to 75% better value when playing F1 23 than Core i5-11400F - £0.13 vs £0.51 per FPS
- Consumes up to 22% less energy than Intel Core i5-11400F - 51 vs 65 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i5-11400F doesn't have integrated graphics
F1 23
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
FPS
260
100%
Value, £/FPS
£0.51/FPS
25%
Price, £
£132.79
15%
FPS Winner
Buy for £132.79 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 19416 minutes ago
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2015
FPS
157
60%
Value, £/FPS
£0.13/FPS
100%
Price, £
£19.99
100%
Value Winner
Buy for £19.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 19416 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2015
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i5-11400F | vs | Intel Celeron G3900 |
---|---|---|
Mar 16th, 2021 | Release Date | Sep 1st, 2015 |
Core i5 | Collection | Celeron |
Rocket Lake | Codename | Skylake |
Intel Socket 1200 | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 2 |
12 | Threads | 2 |
2.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.8 GHz |
4.4 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
65 W | TDP | 51 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
26.0x | Multiplier | 28.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 510 |
No | Overclockable | No |