Key Differences
In short — Core i9-10900F outperforms Celeron G3930T on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i9-10900F is 1213 days newer than Celeron G3930T.
Advantages of Intel Core i9-10900F
- Performs up to 17% better in Dying Light 2: Stay Human than Celeron G3930T - 136 vs 116 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G3930T - 20 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G3930T
- Consumes up to 46% less energy than Intel Core i9-10900F - 35 vs 65 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i9-10900F doesn't have integrated graphics
Dying Light 2: Stay Human
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
136
100%
Value, €/FPS
€2/FPS
100%
Price, €
€272.66
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for €272.66 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 58182 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Desktop • Jan 3rd, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Desktop • Jan 3rd, 2017
Single-Core
548
32.69689737470167%
Multi-Core
948
11.250890102065036%
Intel Core i9-10900F | vs | Intel Celeron G3930T |
---|---|---|
Apr 30th, 2020 | Release Date | Jan 3rd, 2017 |
Core i9 | Collection | Celeron |
Comet Lake | Codename | Kaby Lake |
Intel Socket 1200 | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
10 | Cores | 2 |
20 | Threads | 2 |
2.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.7 GHz |
5.2 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
65 W | TDP | 35 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
28.0x | Multiplier | 27.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 610 |
No | Overclockable | No |