Key Differences
In short — Celeron G3930 outperforms the cheaper Phenom II X4 925 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Phenom II X4 925 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Celeron G3930 is 2794 days newer than the cheaper Phenom II X4 925.
Advantages of AMD Phenom II X4 925
- Up to 60% cheaper than Celeron G3930 - €25.22 vs €63.66
- Up to 60% better value when playing Far Cry 3 than Celeron G3930 - €0.21 vs €0.52 per FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G3930 - 4 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G3930
- Performs up to 2% better in Far Cry 3 than Phenom II X4 925 - 123 vs 120 FPS
- Consumes up to 46% less energy than AMD Phenom II X4 925 - 51 vs 95 Watts
Far Cry 3
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • May 11th, 2009
FPS
120
97.5609756097561%
Value, €/FPS
€0.21/FPS
100%
Price, €
€25.22
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €25.22 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 136 minutes ago
Desktop • Jan 3rd, 2017
FPS
123
100%
Value, €/FPS
€0.52/FPS
40.38461538461538%
Price, €
€63.66
39%
FPS Winner
Buy for €63.66 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 136 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • May 11th, 2009
Desktop • Jan 3rd, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Desktop • May 11th, 2009
Single-Core
320
52.63157894736842%
Multi-Core
930
89.16586768935763%
AMD Phenom II X4 925 | vs | Intel Celeron G3930 |
---|---|---|
May 11th, 2009 | Release Date | Jan 3rd, 2017 |
Phenom II X4 | Collection | Celeron |
Deneb | Codename | Kaby Lake |
AMD Socket AM3 | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 2 |
4 | Threads | 2 |
2.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.9 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
95 W | TDP | 51 W |
45 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
14.0x | Multiplier | 29.0x |
On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 610 |
No | Overclockable | No |