Celeron G1610T vs G3900

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron G3900
2015
2 cores / 2 threads, 51 Watt
1.35
+60.7%
Celeron G1610T
2012
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.84

Celeron G3900 outperforms Celeron G1610T by an impressive 61% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron G3900 and Celeron G1610T processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking22392575
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.186.67
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Celeronno data
Power efficiency2.512.27
Architecture codenameSkylake (2015−2016)Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
Release date1 September 2015 (9 years ago)3 December 2012 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$42$89

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Celeron G1610T has 3606% better value for money than Celeron G3900.

Detailed specifications

Celeron G3900 and Celeron G1610T 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speed2.8 GHz2.3 GHz
Boost clock speed2.8 GHz2.3 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/s5 GT/s
Multiplier28no data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache256 KB (per core)256 KB (per core)
L3 cache4 MB (shared)2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm22 nm
Die size150 mm294 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)65 °C65 °C
Number of transistors1,400 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron G3900 and Celeron G1610T 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketFCLGA1151FCLGA1155
Power consumption (TDP)51 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G3900 and Celeron G1610T. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI+-
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
My WiFino data-
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++

Security technologies

Celeron G3900 and Celeron G1610T technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT--
EDB++
Secure Key+-
SGXYes with Intel® MEno data
OS Guard-no data
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron G3900 and Celeron G1610T are enumerated here.

VT-d+-
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron G3900 and Celeron G1610T. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR3
Maximum memory size64 GB32 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth34.134 GB/s21 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics 510Intel® HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel® Processors
Max video memory64 GBno data
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video+no data
Clear Video HD+-
Graphics max frequency950 MHz1.05 GHz
InTru 3D+-

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron G3900 and Celeron G1610T integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported33
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
DVI+no data

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron G3900 and Celeron G1610T integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution support+no data
Max resolution over HDMI 1.44096x2304@24Hzno data
Max resolution over eDP4096x2304@60Hzno data
Max resolution over DisplayPort4096x2304@60Hzno data
Max resolution over VGAN/Ano data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron G3900 and Celeron G1610T integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX12no data
OpenGL4.4no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron G3900 and Celeron G1610T.

PCIe version3.02.0
PCI Express lanes16no data

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 G3900 1.35
+60.7%
Celeron G1610T 0.84

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.

Celeron G3900 2151
+62.1%
Celeron G1610T 1327

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.

Celeron G3900 585
+77.8%
Celeron G1610T 329

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.

Celeron G3900 1001
+72%
Celeron G1610T 582

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.35 0.84
Recency 1 September 2015 3 December 2012
Chip lithography 14 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 51 Watt 35 Watt

Celeron G3900 has a 60.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 57.1% more advanced lithography process.

Celeron G1610T, on the other hand, has 45.7% lower power consumption.

The Celeron G3900 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron G1610T in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron G3900 and Celeron G1610T, 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 G3900
Celeron G3900
Intel Celeron G1610T
Celeron G1610T

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.


3.2 223 votes

Rate Celeron G3900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 10 votes

Rate Celeron G1610T on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron G3900 or Celeron G1610T, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.