Celeron G4900 vs A8-3800

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A8-3800
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
1.29
Celeron G4900
2018
2 cores / 2 threads, 54 Watt
1.51
+17.1%

Celeron G4900 outperforms A8-3800 by a moderate 17% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A8-3800 and Celeron G4900 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking22862153
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data2.95
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Seriesno dataIntel Celeron
Power efficiency1.882.80
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)Coffee Lake (2017−2019)
Release date30 June 2011 (13 years ago)2 April 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$42

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

A8-3800 and Celeron G4900 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed2.4 GHz3.1 GHz
Boost clock speed2.7 GHz3.1 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 3.0
Bus rateno data4 × 8 GT/s
Multiplierno data31
L1 cache128 KB (per core)128 KB
L2 cache1 MB (per core)512 KB
L3 cache0 KB2 MB
Chip lithography32 nm14 nm
Die size228 mm2126 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data72 °C
Number of transistors1,178 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on A8-3800 and Celeron G4900 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration11 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFM1FCLGA1151
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt54 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-3800 and Celeron G4900. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+

Security technologies

A8-3800 and Celeron G4900 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
MPX-+
Identity Protection-+
SGXno dataYes with Intel® ME
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-3800 and Celeron G4900 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-3800 and Celeron G4900. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4-2400
Maximum memory sizeno data64 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data38.397 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 6550DIntel UHD Graphics 610
Max video memoryno data64 GB
Quick Sync Video-+
Clear Videono data+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequencyno data1.05 GHz
InTru 3Dno data+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A8-3800 and Celeron G4900 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by A8-3800 and Celeron G4900 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution supportno data+
Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4096x2304@24Hz
Max resolution over eDPno data4096x2304@60Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data4096x2304@60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A8-3800 and Celeron G4900 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12
OpenGLno data4.5

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A8-3800 and Celeron G4900.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data16

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

A8-3800 1.29
Celeron G4900 1.51
+17.1%

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

A8-3800 2049
Celeron G4900 2397
+17%

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

A8-3800 291
Celeron G4900 607
+109%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

A8-3800 889
Celeron G4900 1033
+16.2%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.29 1.51
Integrated graphics card 1.04 1.89
Recency 30 June 2011 2 April 2018
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 32 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 54 Watt

A8-3800 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

Celeron G4900, on the other hand, has a 17.1% higher aggregate performance score, 81.7% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 6 years, a 128.6% more advanced lithography process, and 20.4% lower power consumption.

The Celeron G4900 is our recommended choice as it beats the A8-3800 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A8-3800 and Celeron G4900, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD A8-3800
A8-3800
Intel Celeron G4900
Celeron G4900

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.4 71 vote

Rate A8-3800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 116 votes

Rate Celeron G4900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A8-3800 or Celeron G4900, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.