Celeron G3900 vs FirePro A320
Aggregate performance score
Primary details
Comparing FirePro A320 and Celeron G3900 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2235 | 2228 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.18 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | no data | Intel Celeron |
| Power efficiency | 1.29 | 2.52 |
| Architecture codename | Trinity (2012−2013) | Skylake (2015−2016) |
| Release date | 7 August 2012 (12 years ago) | 19 October 2015 (9 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $42 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
FirePro A320 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 cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 2.8 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.2 GHz | 2.8 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 3.0 |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 28 |
| L1 cache | 192K | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | no data | 2 MB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 246 mm2 | 98.57 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 74 °C | 65 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1,303 million | 1,400 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
Compatibility
Information on FirePro A320 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 configuration | 1 | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | FM2 | FCLGA1151 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 51 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FirePro A320 and Celeron G3900. 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 | + | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
Security technologies
FirePro A320 and Celeron G3900 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® ME |
| OS Guard | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FirePro A320 and Celeron G3900 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 FirePro A320 and Celeron G3900. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3-1866 | DDR3, DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 34.134 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | FirePro | Intel HD Graphics 510 |
| Max video memory | no data | 64 GB |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Clear Video | no data | + |
| Clear Video HD | no data | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 950 MHz |
| InTru 3D | no data | + |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of FirePro A320 and Celeron G3900 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
| eDP | no data | + |
| DisplayPort | - | + |
| HDMI | - | + |
| DVI | no data | + |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by FirePro A320 and Celeron G3900 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 |
| Max resolution over VGA | no data | N/A |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by FirePro A320 and Celeron G3900 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | 12 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.4 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FirePro A320 and Celeron G3900.
| 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
| Recency | 7 August 2012 | 19 October 2015 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 51 Watt |
FirePro A320 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
Celeron G3900, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 128.6% more advanced lithography process, and 96.1% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between FirePro A320 and Celeron G3900.
Should you still have questions on choice between FirePro A320 and Celeron G3900, 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.
