In Atomfall, the Celeron G3900 is same performance as the FX-8300. However, it's a much better value for money, as it's $62 cheaper!
Celeron G3900
- Is 2 years and 10 months newer – Sep 01, 2015 vs Oct 23, 2012
- Is 2 years and 10 months newer
- Up to 58% cheaper – $44.04 vs $106.06
- Up to 58% cheaper
- Up to 59% better value in Atomfall – $0.23 vs $0.56/FPS
- Up to 59% better value in Atomfall
- Consumes up to 46% less energy – 51 vs 95 Watts
- Consumes up to 46% less energy
FX-8300
No clear advantages
Atomfall FPS Calculator
Celeron G3900 vs FX-8300: Comparison of performance and price
Celeron G3900
Sep 1st, 2015
Average FPS
189 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
142 FPS
100%
Price, $
$44.04
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.23/FPS
100%
FX-8300
Oct 23rd, 2012
Average FPS
189 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
141 FPS
99%
Price, $
$106.06
41%
Value, $/FPS
$0.56/FPS
41%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Celeron G3900 vs FX-8300 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Celeron G3900 vs FX-8300 in core CPU performance specifications
Celeron G3900
Sep 1st, 2015
Cores
2-core
25%
L3 Cache
4 MB
50%
Base Frequency
2.8 GHz
85%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2133 MHz
100%
FX-8300
Oct 23rd, 2012
Cores
8-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.3 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.9 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1866 MHz
87%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Celeron G3900 Sep 1st, 2015 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | FX-8300 Oct 23rd, 2012 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Sep 1st, 2015 | Release Date | Oct 23rd, 2012 |
| – | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1151 | Socket | AM3+ |
51W | Power Consumption | 95W |
| Other Features | ||
| 2133 MHz (DDR3), 2133 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | 1866 MHz (DDR3) |
| Intel HD 510 | Integrated GPU | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
