Phenom II X4 P920 vs Celeron Dual-Core T3100

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron Dual-Core T3100
2009
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.74
Phenom II X4 P920
2010
4 cores / 4 threads, 25 Watt
0.85
+14.9%

Phenom II X4 P920 outperforms Celeron Dual-Core T3100 by a moderate 15% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and Phenom II X4 P920 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26652562
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Celeron Dual-Core4x AMD Phenom II
Power efficiency2.003.22
Architecture codenamePenryn (2008−2011)Champlain (2010−2011)
Release date1 September 2009 (15 years ago)12 May 2010 (14 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and Phenom II X4 P920 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 cores2 (Dual-core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Boost clock speed1.9 GHz1.6 GHz
Bus rate800 MHz3600 MHz
L1 cache128 KB512 KB
L2 cache1 MB2 MB
Chip lithography45 nm45 nm
Die size107 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Number of transistors410 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and Phenom II X4 P920 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.

SocketBGA479, PGA478S1 (S1g4)
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt25 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and Phenom II X4 P920. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX, 3DNow, SSE (1,2,3,4A), AMD64, Enhanced Virus Protection, Virtualization, HyperTransport 3.0
VirusProtect-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and Phenom II X4 P920 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and Phenom II X4 P920. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3

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.

Celeron Dual-Core T3100 0.74
Phenom II X4 P920 0.85
+14.9%

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Celeron Dual-Core T3100 1900
+36.2%
Phenom II X4 P920 1395

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Celeron Dual-Core T3100 3740
Phenom II X4 P920 5042
+34.8%

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Celeron Dual-Core T3100 1687
Phenom II X4 P920 2083
+23.4%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.74 0.85
Recency 1 September 2009 12 May 2010
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 25 Watt

Phenom II X4 P920 has a 14.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 months, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and 40% lower power consumption.

The Phenom II X4 P920 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron Dual-Core T3100 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and Phenom II X4 P920, 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.


Intel Celeron Dual-Core T3100
Celeron Dual-Core T3100
AMD Phenom II X4 P920
Phenom II X4 P920

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.


3.5 33 votes

Rate Celeron Dual-Core T3100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 35 votes

Rate Phenom II X4 P920 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron Dual-Core T3100 or Phenom II X4 P920, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.