Celeron G4900 vs E3200
Aggregate performance score
Celeron G4900 outperforms Celeron E3200 by a whopping 185% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron E3200 and Celeron G4900 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2853 | 2141 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.88 | 2.95 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | no data | Intel Celeron |
| Power efficiency | 0.77 | 2.80 |
| Architecture codename | Wolfdale (2008−2010) | Coffee Lake (2017−2019) |
| Release date | 30 August 2009 (15 years ago) | 3 April 2018 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $52 | $42 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Celeron G4900 has 2% better value for money than Celeron E3200.
Detailed specifications
Celeron E3200 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 cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 2 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 3.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 3.1 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 3.0 |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 31 |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (shared) | 256K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 82 mm2 | 126 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 74 °C | 100 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 72 °C |
| Number of transistors | 228 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| VID voltage range | 0.85V-1.3625V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron E3200 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 configuration | 1 | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | LGA775 | FCLGA1151 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 54 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron E3200 and Celeron G4900. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2 |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | - |
| Idle States | + | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | + |
Security technologies
Celeron E3200 and Celeron G4900 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | - |
| EDB | + | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| MPX | - | + |
| Identity Protection | - | + |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® ME |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron E3200 and Celeron G4900 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | - | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron E3200 and Celeron G4900. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 | DDR4-2400 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 38.397 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Intel UHD Graphics 610 |
| Max video memory | no data | 64 GB |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Clear Video | no data | + |
| Clear Video HD | no data | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 1.05 GHz |
| InTru 3D | no data | + |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Celeron E3200 and Celeron G4900 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron E3200 and Celeron G4900 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| 4K resolution support | no data | + |
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | no data | 4096x2304@24Hz |
| Max resolution over eDP | no data | 4096x2304@60Hz |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | no data | 4096x2304@60Hz |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Celeron E3200 and Celeron G4900 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | 12 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.5 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron E3200 and Celeron G4900.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 16 |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.53 | 1.51 |
| Recency | 30 August 2009 | 3 April 2018 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 54 Watt |
Celeron G4900 has a 184.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 20.4% lower power consumption.
The Celeron G4900 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron E3200 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron E3200 and Celeron G4900, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
