Celeron G3900 vs Phenom II X4 840

VS

Aggregate performance score

Phenom II X4 840
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.53
+11.7%
Celeron G3900
2015
2 cores / 2 threads, 51 Watt
1.37

Phenom II X4 840 outperforms Celeron G3900 by a moderate 12% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Phenom II X4 840 and Celeron G3900 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking21292231
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.080.18
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Seriesno dataIntel Celeron
Power efficiency1.522.53
Architecture codenamePropus (2009−2011)Skylake (2015−2016)
Release date4 January 2011 (13 years ago)19 October 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$90$42

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Phenom II X4 840 has 1611% better value for money than Celeron G3900.

Detailed specifications

Phenom II X4 840 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed3.2 GHz2.8 GHz
Boost clock speed3.2 GHz2.8 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 3.0
Bus rateno data4 × 8 GT/s
Multiplierno data28
L1 cache128 KB (per core)128 KB
L2 cache512 KB (per core)512 KB
L3 cache0 KB2 MB
Chip lithography45 nm14 nm
Die size169 mm298.57 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data65 °C
Number of transistors300 million1,400 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Phenom II X4 840 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 configuration11 (Uniprocessor)
SocketAM3FCLGA1151
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt51 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom II X4 840 and Celeron G3900. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+

Security technologies

Phenom II X4 840 and Celeron G3900 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
SGXno dataYes with Intel® ME
OS Guardno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom II X4 840 and Celeron G3900 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom II X4 840 and Celeron G3900. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3, DDR4
Maximum memory sizeno data64 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data34.134 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel HD Graphics 510
Max video memoryno data64 GB
Quick Sync Video-+
Clear Videono data+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequencyno data950 MHz
InTru 3Dno data+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Phenom II X4 840 and Celeron G3900 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+
DVIno data+

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Phenom II X4 840 and Celeron G3900 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution supportno data+
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 Phenom II X4 840 and Celeron G3900 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12
OpenGLno data4.4

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Phenom II X4 840 and Celeron G3900.

PCIe version2.03.0
PCI Express lanesno data16

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.

Phenom II X4 840 1.53
+11.7%
Celeron G3900 1.37

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.

Phenom II X4 840 2414
+11.6%
Celeron G3900 2164

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.

Phenom II X4 840 332
Celeron G3900 585
+76.2%

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.

Phenom II X4 840 941
Celeron G3900 1001
+6.4%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.53 1.37
Recency 4 January 2011 19 October 2015
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 45 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 51 Watt

Phenom II X4 840 has a 11.7% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

Celeron G3900, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 86.3% lower power consumption.

The Phenom II X4 840 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron G3900 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom II X4 840 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.


AMD Phenom II X4 840
Phenom II X4 840
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.


3.9 251 vote

Rate Phenom II X4 840 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 Phenom II X4 840 or Celeron G3900, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.