Atom x5-E3940 vs Celeron G4900

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron G4900
2018
2 cores / 2 threads, 51 Watt
1.51
+22.8%
Atom x5-E3940
2014
4 cores / 4 threads, 10 Watt
1.23

Celeron G4900 outperforms Atom x5-E3940 by a significant 23% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron G4900 and Atom x5-E3940 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking21532324
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.95no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesIntel Celeron5x Intel Atom
Power efficiency2.8011.63
Architecture codenameCoffee Lake (2017−2019)Apollo Lake (2014−2016)
Release date3 April 2018 (6 years ago)30 August 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$42no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron G4900 and Atom x5-E3940 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
Base clock speed3.1 GHz1.6 GHz
Boost clock speed3.1 GHz1.8 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier31no data
L1 cache64K (per core)56K (per core)
L2 cache256K (per core)2 MB (shared)
L3 cache6 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Die size126 mm2no data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)72 °C103 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+-

Compatibility

Information on Celeron G4900 and Atom x5-E3940 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 (Uniprocessor)
Socket1151Intel BGA 1296
Power consumption (TDP)51 Watt10 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G4900 and Atom x5-E3940. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++

Security technologies

Celeron G4900 and Atom x5-E3940 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron G4900 and Atom x5-E3940 are enumerated here.

VT-d++
VT-x++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron G4900 and Atom x5-E3940. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Dual-channelDDR3-1866
Maximum memory size64 GB8 GB
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth38.397 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel UHD Graphics 610Intel HD Graphics 500

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron G4900 and Atom x5-E3940.

PCIe version3.02.0
PCI Express lanesno data4

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 G4900 1.51
+22.8%
Atom x5-E3940 1.23

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 G4900 2397
+22.7%
Atom x5-E3940 1953

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.51 1.23
Integrated graphics card 1.89 0.77
Recency 3 April 2018 30 August 2014
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Power consumption (TDP) 51 Watt 10 Watt

Celeron G4900 has a 22.8% higher aggregate performance score, 145.5% faster integrated GPU, and an age advantage of 3 years.

Atom x5-E3940, on the other hand, has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and 410% lower power consumption.

The Celeron G4900 is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom x5-E3940 in performance tests.

Note that Celeron G4900 is a desktop processor while Atom x5-E3940 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron G4900 and Atom x5-E3940, 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 G4900
Celeron G4900
Intel Atom x5-E3940
Atom x5-E3940

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.


3.6 116 votes

Rate Celeron G4900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.1 7 votes

Rate Atom x5-E3940 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron G4900 or Atom x5-E3940, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.