Celeron G3900 vs J4005

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron J4005
2017
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.98
Celeron G3900
2015
2 cores / 2 threads, 51 Watt
1.35
+37.8%

Celeron G3900 outperforms Celeron J4005 by a substantial 38% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron J4005 and Celeron G3900 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking24732239
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.000.18
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Celeron
Power efficiency9.272.51
Architecture codenameGoldmont Plus (2017)Skylake (2015−2016)
Release date11 December 2017 (6 years ago)1 September 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107$42

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Celeron J4005 has 456% better value for money than Celeron G3900.

Detailed specifications

Celeron J4005 and Celeron G3900 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 GHz2.8 GHz
Boost clock speed2.7 GHz2.8 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 3.0
Bus rateno data4 × 8 GT/s
Multiplier2028
L1 cache56 KB (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache4 MB (shared)256 KB (per core)
L3 cache4 MB4 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Die size93 mm2150 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data65 °C
Number of transistorsno data1,400 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+-

Compatibility

Information on Celeron J4005 and Celeron G3900 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)
SocketFCBGA1090FCLGA1151
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt51 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J4005 and Celeron G3900. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI++
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shift-no data
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Smart Response-no data
GPIO+no data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0-no data

Security technologies

Celeron J4005 and Celeron G3900 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDB++
Secure Key++
MPX+-
Identity Protection+-
SGXYes with Intel® MEYes with Intel® ME
OS Guard+-
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron J4005 and Celeron G3900 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron J4005 and Celeron G3900. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR3, DDR4
Maximum memory size8 GB64 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth38.397 GB/s34.134 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel UHD Graphics 600Intel HD Graphics 510
Max video memory8 GB64 GB
Quick Sync Video++
Clear Videono data+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequency700 MHz950 MHz
Execution Units12no data
InTru 3Dno data+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron J4005 and Celeron G3900 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported33
eDP++
DisplayPort++
HDMI++
DVIno data+
MIPI-DSI+no data

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron J4005 and Celeron G3900 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution support++
Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4096x2304@24Hz
Max resolution over eDPno data4096x2304@60Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data4096x2304@60Hz
Max resolution over VGAno dataN/A

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron J4005 and Celeron G3900 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX1212
OpenGL4.44.4

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J4005 and Celeron G3900.

PCIe version2.03.0
PCI Express lanes616
USB revision2.0/3.0no data
Total number of SATA ports2no data
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports2no data
Number of USB ports8no data
Integrated LAN-no data
UART+no 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 J4005 0.98
Celeron G3900 1.35
+37.8%

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 J4005 1553
Celeron G3900 2151
+38.5%

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 J4005 344
Celeron G3900 585
+70.1%

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 J4005 579
Celeron G3900 1001
+72.9%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.98 1.35
Integrated graphics card 0.87 1.61
Recency 11 December 2017 1 September 2015
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 51 Watt

Celeron J4005 has an age advantage of 2 years, and 410% lower power consumption.

Celeron G3900, on the other hand, has a 37.8% higher aggregate performance score, and 85.1% faster integrated GPU.

The Celeron G3900 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron J4005 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J4005 and Celeron G3900, 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 J4005
Celeron J4005
Intel Celeron G3900
Celeron G3900

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.


3.1 163 votes

Rate Celeron J4005 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 223 votes

Rate Celeron G3900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron J4005 or Celeron G3900, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.