Key Differences
In short, we have a clear winner — Celeron G3900 outperforms the more expensive FX-6300 on the selected game parameters, and is also a better bang for your buck! The better performing Celeron G3900 is 1043 days newer than the more expensive FX-6300.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G3900
- Performs up to 1% better in Red Dead Redemption 2 than FX-6300 - 150 vs 149 FPS
- Up to 46% cheaper than FX-6300 - $39.9 vs $74.04
- Up to 46% better value when playing Red Dead Redemption 2 than FX-6300 - $0.27 vs $0.5 per FPS
- Consumes up to 46% less energy than AMD FX-6300 - 51 vs 95 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-6300 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD FX-6300
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G3900 - 6 vs 2 threads
Red Dead Redemption 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Highest
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2015
FPS
150
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.27/FPS
100%
Price, $
$39.9
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for $39.9 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 14107 minutes ago
Buy for $74.04 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 14107 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Highest
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2015
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron G3900 | vs | AMD FX-6300 |
---|---|---|
Sep 1st, 2015 | Release Date | Oct 23rd, 2012 |
Celeron | Collection | FX |
Skylake | Codename | Vishera |
Intel Socket 1151 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 6 |
2 | Threads | 6 |
2.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.1 GHz |
51 W | TDP | 95 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
28.0x | Multiplier | 17.5x |
Intel HD 510 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |