EPYC 4484PX vs Celeron G3920
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 4484PX outperforms Celeron G3920 by a whopping 2074% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron G3920 and EPYC 4484PX processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2151 | 126 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.17 | 47.62 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Series | Intel Celeron | no data |
| Power efficiency | 2.75 | 25.38 |
| Architecture codename | Skylake (2015−2016) | Raphael (2023−2024) |
| Release date | 1 September 2015 (9 years ago) | 21 May 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $52 | $599 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
EPYC 4484PX has 27912% better value for money than Celeron G3920.
Detailed specifications
Celeron G3920 and EPYC 4484PX 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) | 12 (Dodeca-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 24 |
| Base clock speed | 2.9 GHz | 4.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.9 GHz | 5.6 GHz |
| Bus type | DMI 3.0 | no data |
| Bus rate | 4 × 8 GT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | 29 | no data |
| L1 cache | 64K (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 256K (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 128 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 5 nm |
| Die size | 150 mm2 | 2x 71 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 65 °C | 47 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1,400 million | 17,840 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron G3920 and EPYC 4484PX 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 (Uniprocessor) | 1 |
| Socket | FCLGA1151 | AM5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 51 Watt | 120 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G3920 and EPYC 4484PX. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Security technologies
Celeron G3920 and EPYC 4484PX technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
| Secure Key | + | no data |
| SGX | Yes with Intel® ME | no data |
| OS Guard | - | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron G3920 and EPYC 4484PX are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron G3920 and EPYC 4484PX. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3, DDR4 | DDR5 |
| Maximum memory size | 64 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 34.134 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Intel HD Graphics 510 | AMD Radeon Graphics |
| Max video memory | 64 GB | no data |
| Quick Sync Video | + | - |
| Clear Video | + | no data |
| Clear Video HD | + | no data |
| Graphics max frequency | 950 MHz | no data |
| InTru 3D | + | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Celeron G3920 and EPYC 4484PX integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 3 | no data |
| eDP | + | no data |
| DisplayPort | + | - |
| HDMI | + | - |
| DVI | + | no data |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron G3920 and EPYC 4484PX integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| 4K resolution support | + | no data |
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | 4096x2304@24Hz | no data |
| Max resolution over eDP | 4096x2304@60Hz | no data |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | 4096x2304@60Hz | no data |
| Max resolution over VGA | N/A | no data |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Celeron G3920 and EPYC 4484PX integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | 12 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron G3920 and EPYC 4484PX.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 28 |
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 | 1.48 | 32.18 |
| Integrated graphics card | 1.61 | 1.98 |
| Recency | 1 September 2015 | 21 May 2024 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 12 |
| Threads | 2 | 24 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 51 Watt | 120 Watt |
Celeron G3920 has 135.3% lower power consumption.
EPYC 4484PX, on the other hand, has a 2074.3% higher aggregate performance score, 23% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 8 years, 500% more physical cores and 1100% more threads, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.
The EPYC 4484PX is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron G3920 in performance tests.
Note that Celeron G3920 is a desktop processor while EPYC 4484PX is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron G3920 and EPYC 4484PX, 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.
