Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Celeron G3930 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Ryzen 9 3900X is 915 days newer than Celeron G3930.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G3930
- Consumes up to 51% less energy than AMD Ryzen 9 3900X - 51 vs 105 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen 9 3900X doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 9 3900X
- Performs up to 16% better in Dying Light 2: Stay Human than Celeron G3930 - 136 vs 117 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G3930 - 24 vs 2 threads
Dying Light 2: Stay Human
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Buy for €63.66 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 75088 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Desktop • Jan 3rd, 2017
Desktop • Jul 7th, 2019
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Desktop • Jan 3rd, 2017
Single-Core
608
35.91258121677496%
Multi-Core
1043
10.495069430468908%
Intel Celeron G3930 | vs | AMD Ryzen 9 3900X |
---|---|---|
Jan 3rd, 2017 | Release Date | Jul 7th, 2019 |
Celeron | Collection | Ryzen 9 |
Kaby Lake | Codename | Matisse |
Intel Socket 1151 | Socket | AMD Socket AM4 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 12 |
2 | Threads | 24 |
2.9 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.8 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.6 GHz |
51 W | TDP | 105 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 7 nm |
29.0x | Multiplier | 38.0x |
Intel HD 610 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |